Noncontingent reinforcement is an empirically supported treatment for problem behavior exhibited by individuals with developmental disabilities.

The authors pulled every NCR study they could find on people with developmental disabilities. They used strict rules to decide which papers counted and which did not.

They sorted the studies into two piles: fixed-time NCR plus extinction, and variable-time NCR plus extinction. Then they asked, 'Does the science show these packages work?'

Fixed-time NCR plus extinction earned the top label: 'well-established treatment.' Variable-time NCR plus extinction landed one step lower: 'probably efficacious.'

In plain words, both packages cut problem behavior, but the fixed-time version has the strongest proof behind it.

Lancioni et al. (2000) and Wilkinson et al. (1998) told us NCR could work; the 2009 paper upgrades that story with hard numbers and a formal evidence grade. It does not replace the older reviews—it seals the deal.

Phillips et al. (2017) looked at 27 real kids in a clinic and found NCR alone helped most socially-maintained cases. Their field data line up with the 'well-established' label, showing the review holds in everyday practice.

Lerner et al. (2012) saw behavior spike when NCR was thinned without extinction. That warning fits the review’s rule: pair thinning with extinction to keep gains.

You can now tell parents, funders, and teachers that fixed-time NCR plus extinction is not just a good idea—it is an evidence-based treatment. Start with a dense fixed schedule matched to the behavior’s function, add extinction, and thin slowly while watching for resurgence. If the behavior is automatically reinforced, plan extra steps like sensory-matched stimuli or competing items, but the same core package still applies.