Using neutralizing routines to reduce problem behaviors.
A five-minute neutral activity right after an EO blocks later problem behavior when the demand finally arrives.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Three teens with intellectual disability took part. Each had escape-related problem behavior.
The team first found a trigger sequence: an establishing operation (EO) followed by a demand cue (SD).
They then slipped a five-minute neutralizing routine between the EO and the SD. The routine was simple: easy puzzles, music, or light chat. They used an ABAB reversal to check if the routine really mattered.
What they found
When the neutralizing routine was used, problem behavior almost vanished. When it was removed, the behavior returned. The pattern repeated in every reversal.
The quick activity did not remove the demand; it just reset the EO so the later cue no longer sparked trouble.
How this fits with other research
Kennedy et al. (1993) tried an earlier EO fix. They removed morning setting events and saw the same drop in problem behavior. The 1997 paper keeps the EO but adds a buffer, showing you can neutralize instead of eliminate.
Grove et al. (2017) used satiation before the session. They gave kids with autism free access to the wanted item until three calm signs showed. Both studies shrink the EO; one uses satiation, the other a brief activity.
Leezenbaum et al. (2019) worked with detained teens. They gave fixed-time attention to lower the attention EO. Again, the idea is the same: tame the EO and later demands go smoothly.
Why it matters
You can copy this on Monday. After you spot an EO—say, a long wait or hard math warm-up—insert a five-minute neutral break. Use music, puzzles, or a quick walk. Then present the demand. The study says this tiny pause can wipe out the problem burst that usually follows. No extra tokens, no extinction, just timing.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →After you see an EO building, run a calm five-minute puzzle or music break, then give the demand and watch the data.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Establishing operations can alter problem behaviors by changing the momentary value of reinforcers associated with those problem behaviors. If establishing operations (EOs) precede the presentation of discriminative stimuli (SDs) for problem behaviors, it may be possible to introduce neutralizing routines that both reduce the value of reinforcers associated with problem behaviors and decrease the occurrence of problem behaviors. The present study examined this logic with 3 adolescents with severe intellectual disabilities. Initial functional analyses indicated that problem behaviors were motivated by either escape or tangible items. Functional assessment interviews identified possible establishing operations that were associated with the occurrence of problem behavior and indicated that these establishing operations occurred over 1 hr before presentation of the SD for problem behaviors. We used an alternating treatments design to examine problem behaviors during instruction under four conditions: EO + SD, SD only, EO only, and neither SD nor EO. For all 3 participants, problem behaviors occurred almost exclusively during the EO + SD condition. A further analysis compared the EO + SD condition when neutralizing routines were embedded between the EO and the SD. Results from an ABAB reversal design supported the effectiveness of neutralizing routines to reduce these problem behaviors. Applied and theoretical implications are discussed.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1997 · doi:10.1901/jaba.1997.30-601