Assessment and treatment of pica and destruction of holiday decorations.

The team worked with one preschooler who had autism. The child kept eating holiday decorations and tearing them apart.

First they tried DRA alone. They praised and gave toys when the child played nicely. They measured pica, decoration destruction, and toy play across sessions.

DRA by itself barely changed the behavior. Pica and destruction stayed high.

When they added a quick facial screen—briefly covering the child’s eyes after each problem behavior—pica and destruction dropped fast. Toy play shot up.

Diz et al. (2011) and Ganz et al. (2004) both say the best pica treatments pair reinforcement with some response-reduction step. The facial screen is a new, gentle example of that pair.

Bhaumik et al. (2009) show DRA alone usually works for destructive behavior. This study seems to contradict that, but the child’s pica was automatically reinforced—he liked the feel of the items. DRA alone often fails when the behavior is its own reward.

Briggs et al. (2019) kept DRA effective by making the alternative reward bigger and better. R et al. took the opposite path: they kept the same reward and added a mild consequence. Both fixes point to the same lesson—when DRA stalls, tweak it.

If you run DRA for pica or object destruction and see flat data, don’t jump to harsh punishers. Try a brief facial screen first. It takes seconds, needs no extra toys, and can turn the tide quickly. Document each step with simple line graphs so parents see the change.