Needed independent and dependent variables in multi-element behavior support plans addressing severe behavior problems
Track episode severity as its own safety score and keep non-punitive reactive moves like strategic capitulation in preschool BSPs.
01Research in Context
What this study did
LaVigna et al. (2022) built multi-element behavior support plans for three preschoolers with developmental delay.
Each plan came from a full functional assessment and used only gentle moves: change the scene before trouble starts and have calm, non-punitive reactions ready when trouble still happens.
One reaction was "strategic capitulation"—briefly giving the item or attention the child wanted to keep everyone safe.
What they found
Problem behavior happened less often and the episodes that did occur were less dangerous.
The team counted both frequency and a new score called "episodic severity" to track safety, not just how many times the behavior popped up.
How this fits with other research
Dunlap et al. (1991) did the same FBA-to-plan pipeline 31 years earlier with a high-school student and also wiped out severe behavior, but they did not list non-aversive back-up moves like strategic capitulation.
Orsmond et al. (2009) used context tweaks in regular classrooms to nearly erase problem behavior, matching the current study’s proactive spirit but without the reactive safety layer.
Pitts et al. (2019) stretched function-based plans across ages 4-13 in a UK special school; LaVigna narrows the lens to preschool and adds the extra safety metric of episodic severity.
Why it matters
You now have permission to add gentle, planful "give-ins" to your BSPs without calling it failure. Track how bad each episode gets, not just how many happen. If you serve young kids with big behavior, copy the two-part score sheet—frequency plus severity—and keep a strategic capitulation step in your back pocket for crisis moments.
Get CEUs on This Topic — Free
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Add an "episodic severity" column to your data sheet and write one calm give-in step you can use if safety is at risk.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Ethically , behavior analysts are required to use the least aversive and restrictive procedures capable of managing behaviors of concern. This article introduces and discusses a multi-element paradigm for devising support plans that include ecological, positive programming, and focused-support proactive strategies for reducing the frequency of problem behavior occurrence. It also includes reactive strategies, i.e., separate independent variables. In this paradigm, reactive strategies are aimed solely at getting rapid, safe control over the incident, thereby reducing measured and quantified episodic severity. Behavior analysts who publish in mainstream behavioral journals do not always make it explicit how they, in fact, successfully employed non-aversive reactive procedures to achieve rapid/safe control over the severity of a behavioral incident. Three examples of published studies in the behavioral literature which successfully, though only implicitly, used non-aversive reactive strategies (NARS) to reduce the severity of the behaviors of concern are described. The multi-element paradigm discussed in the present article is illustrated by the support plans that address the challenging behavior of three children in a pre-school setting, using both proactive and reactive strategies. Reactive strategies were used for the purpose of reducing episodic severity (ES) and proactive strategies were aimed at reducing the frequency of occurrence. Following a comprehensive functional analysis and assessment (CFA) and the implementation of a multi-element behavior support (MEBS) plan, results show successful outcomes without the need for any aversive or restrictive procedures. When addressing severe behaviors of concern, in addition to reducing behavioral occurrence, safety should also be improved by reducing ES as a measured outcome and as a function of the reactive strategies employed, including in many cases, the use of strategic capitulation, i.e., providing the identified reinforcer for the target behavior.
Perspectives on Behavior Science, 2022 · doi:10.1007/s40614-022-00331-4