Treating excessively slow responding of a young man with Asperger syndrome using differential reinforcement of short response latencies.

Pitetti et al. (2007) worked with one teen who had Asperger syndrome. He took far too long to answer questions and finish math problems.

The team used differential reinforcement of short latencies. They gave praise and points only when he answered within a set fast time.

The teen’s response times dropped quickly for both tasks. He kept the faster pace even when the speed goal was made tougher.

Brief discrimination training helped him learn which problems truly needed more thought. After that, he rarely rushed on hard items.

Wilkinson et al. (1998) used a similar logic but for the opposite problem. They reinforced the absence of disruptive behavior with DRO, while H et al. reinforced the presence of quick, correct responses. Both show you can shape the time dimension by deciding what gets reinforcement.

Diemer et al. (2023) also targeted timing in autism, but they slowed down rapid eating. Together the papers prove you can move response time in either direction—faster or slower—by arranging consequences around the clock.

Chen et al. (2001) describe wide social-communication gaps in teens with Asperger syndrome. H et al. add a practical footnote: once you spot slow responding, a simple DR latency plan can fix it without new social skills curricula.

If a client with autism drags out seat-work or answers, you now have a ready protocol. Set a short latency criterion, deliver tokens or praise immediately when the beat the clock, and add brief discrimination trials so harder items can still get extra time. The whole package takes one session to start and needs no extra staff.