The role of signals in two variations of differential‐reinforcement‐of‐low‐rate procedures

Becraft et al. (2018) tested two kinds of DRL with preschoolers. One kind waits for a set time between responses. The other kind waits until the end of a long interval.

They added colored cards as signals. Green meant “go ahead.” Red meant “wait.” Kids got small toys when they followed the rules.

When the signals were present, both DRL types cut the kids’ talking or button pressing by half or more. The drops stayed steady every day.

Without signals, the same DRL plans worked some days and failed others. The signals made the rules clear and the results reliable.

Jessel et al. (2014) ran a lab study with adults and saw the full-session DRL often stop responding. Becraft added signals and showed preschoolers keep going, just slower. The signals solved the suppression problem.

TCruz-Montecinos et al. (2024) later used DRL as a group game for five boys with autism. They also saw steady drops in loud talk. The two studies together tell us DRL works from daycare to middle school and across diagnoses.

Ellingsen et al. (2014) showed signals control pausing in adults. Becraft mirrors that finding in young kids, proving the principle holds across ages and responses.

If you run DRL for chatter, hand flaps, or any frequent behavior, add a clear S+ and S- signal. A green card, check mark, or tablet icon works. Kids then know exactly when they may respond and when they should wait, keeping your reductions stable and your session moving.