The effects of noncontingent delivery of high- and low-preference stimuli on attention-maintained destructive behavior.

The team tested noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) without extinction. They gave high-preference and low-preference items on a fixed schedule.

Participants had intellectual disability and hit, bit, or threw things for attention. An alternating-treatments design flipped the item each session.

High-preference items cut destructive behavior almost to zero. Low-preference items did nothing; problem behavior stayed high.

The result held even though staff never withheld attention for misbehavior. Good stimuli alone made the difference.

Cox et al. (2015) extends this work. They showed you can find those powerful items with a video-based paired-stimulus test. No need to let the child play with the toy first.

Milnes et al. (2019) used the same quick-switch design while treating food packing. Both studies prove an alternating-treatments layout spots the better procedure fast.

Chiviacowsky et al. (2013) tackled multiply-controlled problem behavior with FCT and chained schedules. Their schedule twist is another option when NCR alone is not enough.

If you cannot use extinction—maybe safety or staffing—run a solid preference assessment and deliver the top items on a timer. One high-preference stimulus on a fixed schedule can keep attention-maintained destruction low without extra response blocking or ignoring. Check the item still wins high ranks each month so the NCR stays strong.