ABA Fundamentals

The effects of variable-time versus contingent reinforcement delivery on problem behavior maintained by escape.

Lomas Mevers et al. (2014) · Journal of applied behavior analysis 2014
★ The Verdict

Reinforcing compliance right away beats handing out the same goodies on a fixed timer when kids want to escape work.

✓ Read this if BCBAs treating escape-maintained problem behavior in school or clinic settings.
✗ Skip if Practitioners working with sensory or automatic problem behavior.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Four children who hit, screamed, or ran away during schoolwork took part. The team guessed the kids acted out to dodge the tasks.

Sessions flipped between two setups. In one, the child got a cracker and praise right after finishing a request. In the other, the same treats arrived every 30 seconds no matter what the child did.

02

What they found

Three of the four kids behaved better when rewards hinged on compliance. Problem behavior dropped and work completion rose.

The fourth child showed little difference between the two setups, but the trend still favored the contingent plan.

03

How this fits with other research

Kahng et al. (1999) saw the same edge for edible rewards over break rewards during escape tasks. Both studies say, 'Give something good for doing the work, not for taking a break.'

Slocum et al. (2025) pushed the idea further in a 2025 trial with the kids. They found that pairing contingent praise with easy-hard task mixes beat classic escape extinction during the first ten sessions. The 2014 paper set the stage; Slocum scaled it up.

Xue et al. (2024) looked at autism and tact training. They also found that immediate beats variable-time delivery, even when delays were only four to eight seconds. The pattern holds across skills and diagnoses.

04

Why it matters

If a learner's problem behavior is fueled by task avoidance, skip the kitchen timer method. Deliver your edible, toy, or praise the moment the response ends. You will likely see faster drops in escape behavior and smoother compliance without extra extinction steps.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Put the timer away—give the chip, sticker, or 'nice job' within one second of the correct response.

02At a glance

Intervention
differential reinforcement
Design
alternating treatments
Sample size
4
Finding
positive

03Original abstract

Results of previous research indicate that the delivery of positive reinforcement (e.g., food) for an appropriate, alternative target response (e.g., compliance) or delivery of food on a time-based schedule can decrease problem behavior reinforced by escape, even when problem behavior continues to produce negative reinforcement (e.g., Lalli et al., ; Lomas, Fisher, & Kelley, ). In this study, we compared the levels of both compliance and problem behavior when food and praise were delivered either contingent on compliance or on a time-based schedule. Results for 3 of the 4 participants showed that contingent delivery of preferred edible items and praise was more effective in both reducing problem behavior and increasing compliance compared to variable-time delivery of these same items. These findings are discussed in the context of motivating operations and competition between positive and negative reinforcement.

Journal of applied behavior analysis, 2014 · doi:10.1002/jaba.110