A preliminary procedure for predicting the positive and negative effects of reinforcement-based procedures.

The team wanted a quick way to spot which toys might make self-injury worse during DRO.

They asked adults with intellectual disability to pick high- and low-preference items.

Then they ran DRO with each type of item to see if SIB rose, fell, or stayed the same.

High-preference/high-SIB toys made self-injury climb when used as DRO reinforcers.

Low-preference/low-SIB toys did nothing to SIB, proving the short list could warn you.

The simple test predicted the danger before real treatment started.

Haddock et al. (2020) later showed competing-stimulus tests usually pick items that cut problem behavior.

Our 1996 result looks opposite until you see we flagged items that co-occurred with SIB, not just any preferred item.

McMillan et al. (1999) also used a paired-choice test to build an enriched space that lowered SIB, backing the idea that careful selection matters.

Wanchisen et al. (1989) had already proved a fast presession choice can wipe out maladaptive acts, so the warning tool we describe simply adds a safety screen before you start.

Before you place a favorite toy in the DRO bin, run the five-minute check described here.

If the item shows up when SIB is high, swap it out for something neutral.

This one extra step can stop your reinforcement plan from accidentally feeding the very behavior you want to lose.