Using self‐monitoring and differential reinforcement of low rates of behavior to decrease repetitive behaviors: A case study

Looney et al. (2018) worked with one autistic child who rocked and flapped his hands. The team gave the boy a small clicker. He pressed it each time he noticed the movement. If he kept the clicks under a set number, he earned extra play time.

The study used an ABAB design. The DRL package was on, then off, then on again. This showed if the clicks and rewards really controlled the stereotypy.

When the clicker plus DRL was active, the boy's body rocking dropped by half. The behavior bounced back each time the package was removed. The simple self-count plus reward cut automatically reinforced stereotypy without adult prompts.

Matson et al. (1994) extends this idea to younger, less verbal children. Their picture cards helped preschoolers with autism cut stereotypy while learning daily tasks. The 2018 clicker works for older kids who can count; the 1994 cards work for kids who cannot.

Marcucella (1974) showed the basic DRL rule forty years earlier. Pigeons pecked less when a light signaled the schedule. Looney et al. moved the same rule from lab to clinic and added self-monitoring.

Davison et al. (1984) found that adults with ID kept working after staff praise stopped once they tracked their own output. Looney's case mirrors this: the boy's own clicks, not adult reminders, held the gains.

You can hand a clicker to any client who can count and wants screen time. Set a low but fair limit for clicks. Let the child score his own stereotypy and cash in for a favorite activity. No extra staff, no extra tokens, just a pocket-sized tool that halves repetitive movement in one session.