Assessment and treatment of high‐risk challenging behavior of adolescents with autism in an aquatic setting

Two teens with autism hated leaving the locker room for swim lessons. Lifeguards, not BCBAs, ran the plan.

The team used differential reinforcement without extinction. Kids got snacks and praise for walking to the pool on time. No one blocked or ignored the old behavior.

Sessions happened during regular public swim times. Staff kept data on how long transition took and how much problem behavior occurred.

Transition time dropped from minutes to seconds. Problem behavior stayed low for weeks.

Lifeguards said the plan was easy and fair. They kept using it after the study ended.

Nevin et al. (2016) warned that rich reinforcement can cause relapse later. Dowdy’s team skipped extinction anyway and still saw lasting gains. The difference: Nevin worked in a lab with younger kids and added extinction during treatment. Dowdy stayed in a real pool with teens and kept reinforcement only.

Noel et al. (2016) also cut disruptive behavior in autism, but used noncontingent reinforcement in a classroom. Both studies show front-line staff can run simple reinforcement plans without weeks of BCBA training.

Maraventano et al. (2026) later moved the same idea into jobs. They matched work tasks to adult preferences instead of giving extra treats. Both papers push the field from clinic control to community cooperation.

You can teach lifeguards, camp counselors, or gym teachers to run DR without extinction in one afternoon. The pool study gives you a script: pick a reinforcer the teen already likes, deliver it right after the first step toward the transition, and never withhold the old escape. Copy this in any community spot where kids stall or act out—skate parks, bowling alleys, or school hallways.