A systematic review and evaluation of response redirection as a treatment for challenging behavior in individuals with developmental disabilities.
Redirection shrinks stereotypy but still lacks the evidence badge, so treat it as a work-in-progress, not a sure bet.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Lydon et al. (2013) hunted every paper that used response redirection to cut challenging behavior in people with developmental disabilities. They screened the studies against the Reichow rules — the tough checklist for calling an ABA tactic evidence-based.
The team asked: Do redirection and RIRD meet the gold standard, or do they just look good in single stories?
What they found
Redirection gave big drops in stereotypy, but the dips were not complete. More importantly, the pile of studies was too small and too weak to pass the Reichow bar.
Bottom line: redirection works, yet it is still not labeled evidence-based.
How this fits with other research
Sloman et al. (2024) extends this picture. They showed that low-preference tasks in RIRD beat high-preference ones for three of four kids. The 2024 study adds a dial you can turn — task preference — to make redirection stronger.
Johnson et al. (2021) ran a parallel systematic review on noncontingent reinforcement. Like Sinéad, they found lab success but cried foul on real-world proof. Both papers warn us not to bank on an intervention until it survives outside the clinic.
Gehrman et al. (2017) compared two DRO flavors for stereotypy and saw equal, large cuts. Their fine-grain test matches the spirit of Sinéad’s call: keep pulling the procedure apart until we know which pieces matter.
Why it matters
You can keep redirection in your toolbox, but do not over-sell it. Pair it with data, watch for partial effects, and tweak variables like task preference shown in Sloman et al. (2024). Track generalization and keep looking for stronger, evidence-based mates such as well-designed DRO or NCR plus solid reinforcement. Treat redirection as promising, not proven.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Try low-preference tasks next time you run RIRD and graph if stereotypy drops further.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Response redirection is widely used in clinical practice as a treatment for repetitive behavior or stereotypy in persons with developmental disabilities. However, to date the procedure has received comparatively little empirical evaluation. The current review sought to examine the literature describing the efficacy of response redirection alone, response interruption and redirection (RIRD), and multi-element treatment packages incorporating response redirection, as interventions for challenging behavior in individuals with developmental disabilities. Additionally, the status of response redirection, and RIRD, as evidence-based practice was evaluated in accordance with Reichow's (2011) recently developed criteria. Results indicated that interventions involving response redirection or RIRD typically led to large decreases in challenging behavior but did not result in behavioral suppression. On the basis of the current literature and in accordance with Reichow's criteria, interventions incorporating response redirection do not yet constitute evidence-based practice. The implications of these findings, for both research and practice, are discussed.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2013 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2013.06.010