Use of noncontingent reinforcement in the treatment of challenging behavior. A review and clinical guide.

Wilkinson et al. (1998) wrote a how-to guide on noncontingent reinforcement. They pulled together early studies and gave step-by-step rules for clinicians.

The guide targets kids and adults with developmental delays who show hitting, screaming, or self-injury. It tells you to pick the reinforcer that keeps the problem alive and deliver it on a fixed-time schedule.

The review says start with continuous NCR — give the reinforcer every minute or even non-stop. Once behavior drops, thin the schedule slowly.

The paper does not give new data. It sums up the field and offers a clinical road map.

Lancioni et al. (2009) later ran a formal systematic review and bumped NCR to 'well-established' status. That paper turns the 1998 advice into an evidence-based treatment.

Phillips et al. (2017) tested the 1998 protocol on 27 real cases. NCR alone worked for most socially maintained problems, but kids with automatic reinforcement needed extra tactics.

Lerner et al. (2012) showed the danger hidden in the 1998 thinning rule. When they thinned NCR without adding extinction, problem behavior came back. Pairing thinning with extinction kept gains intact.

You still see this 1998 guide taped to clinic walls because it gives a clear recipe: match the function, start dense, then thin. Follow it, but add the safety checks newer studies show — use extinction while thinning and be ready to layer in extra interventions for automatically reinforced behavior.