By Matt Harrington, BCBA · Behaviorist Book Club · Research-backed answers for behavior analysts
Informed consent is a legal process in which a guardian or individual with legal capacity agrees to participate in treatment after being provided with relevant information about the risks, benefits, and alternatives. Assent is a behavioral concept referring to the individual's ongoing, moment-to-moment agreement to participate in an activity. Assent does not require cognitive understanding of the treatment plan; it is demonstrated through observable behavior such as approach, engagement, or cooperation. Both are ethically important, but assent is particularly relevant for individuals who cannot provide legal consent themselves.
No. Assent-based programming does not mean avoiding all demands. It means designing instructional contexts that minimize unnecessary aversiveness while maintaining clinical goals. Learners still encounter challenging tasks, but the practitioner uses antecedent strategies such as choice, appropriate difficulty levels, and high-quality reinforcement to make participation more likely. When a learner withdraws assent, the response is to modify the context rather than to abandon the goal entirely. The aim is to find conditions under which the learner is willing to engage with the challenging material.
Identifying assent in nonverbal learners requires systematic observation and individualized operational definitions. Common behavioral indicators of assent include approaching the instructional area, orienting toward materials, reaching for items, sustaining engagement with tasks, and showing relaxed body posture. Indicators of assent withdrawal may include turning away, pushing materials, moving away from the area, increased stereotypy, or engaging in behaviors historically maintained by escape. These indicators should be defined specifically for each learner and validated through observation across conditions.
Extinction of escape behavior is not categorically unethical, but it requires careful justification. The Ethics Code requires the use of least restrictive effective procedures, so extinction should generally be considered after antecedent modifications have been explored. When safety concerns make demand removal dangerous, or when the skill being taught is critical and no less restrictive alternative has proven effective, extinction may be warranted. However, the clinical justification must be documented, the procedure must be implemented with proper training and monitoring, and the learner's response must be closely observed for signs of excessive distress.
Modern functional analysis methods provide more detailed information about the specific variables that motivate escape behavior. Rather than simply identifying escape as a function, these analyses can reveal which features of the instructional context are most aversive, such as task type, difficulty level, duration, or social demands. This precision allows practitioners to modify the specific variables driving escape motivation rather than applying broad extinction procedures. When you know exactly what makes a demand aversive, you can change that feature while maintaining the instructional objective.
Begin by understanding the caregiver's concerns, which often center on fears that honoring assent will slow progress or teach the child that refusal is always successful. Provide data-based explanations of how motivation-based approaches can produce equivalent or superior long-term outcomes. Share examples of how modifying instructional conditions reduced problem behavior and increased skill acquisition for other learners. If the caregiver remains concerned, consider a trial period with clear data collection criteria so both parties can evaluate the approach based on outcomes rather than assumptions.
The behavior intervention plan should include operational definitions of assent and withdrawal of assent for the specific learner, the monitoring procedures that will be used during sessions, the tiered response protocol for when assent is withdrawn, and the conditions under which demands may be maintained despite withdrawal of assent. This documentation demonstrates that assent is being systematically addressed rather than informally managed. It also provides the treatment team with clear guidance on how to respond when assent-related situations arise during sessions.
Yes, but it requires additional planning. In group settings, the practitioner must balance the needs of multiple learners, some of whom may withdraw assent at different times. Strategies include building choice into group activities, having alternative tasks available for learners who withdraw from the current activity, and designing group structures that allow for individual pacing. The key is establishing protocols that allow a learner to temporarily disengage from a group activity without disrupting the learning of others, while ensuring that the practitioner can re-engage that learner when conditions are more favorable.
Motivating operations influence the value of reinforcers and the likelihood of behavior. When instructional demands are associated with high-value reinforcement and low-aversiveness, the motivating operations favor participation. Practitioners can manipulate these operations by conducting preference assessments to identify current high-value reinforcers, using deprivation and satiation strategically, embedding preferred activities within instructional sequences, and adjusting the effort-to-reinforcement ratio. When motivating operations are favorable, learners are more likely to assent to instructional activities because participation is genuinely reinforcing.
Track frequency of assent withdrawal across sessions, the contexts in which it occurs, the strategies used to restore engagement and their success rates, skill acquisition data compared to previous programming approaches, frequency of problem behavior during instruction, and the proportion of session time spent in active engagement versus disengagement. Over time, effective assent-based programming should show decreased frequency of assent withdrawal, maintained or improved skill acquisition rates, and reduced problem behavior. These data provide the evidence base for continued use of the approach.
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Ready to go deeper? This course covers this topic with structured learning objectives and CEU credit.
The Ethical Considerations of Assent in the Development of Instructional Motivation — Do Better Collective · 2 BACB Ethics CEUs · $60
Take This Course →2 BACB Ethics CEUs · $60 · Do Better Collective
Research-backed educational guide with practice recommendations
Side-by-side comparison with clinical decision framework
You earn CEUs from a dozen different places. Upload any certificate — from here, your employer, conferences, wherever — and always know exactly where you stand. Learning, Ethics, Supervision, all handled.
No credit card required. Cancel anytime.
All behavior-analytic intervention is individualized. The information on this page is for educational purposes and does not constitute clinical advice. Treatment decisions should be informed by the best available published research, individualized assessment, and obtained with the informed consent of the client or their legal guardian. Behavior analysts are responsible for practicing within the boundaries of their competence and adhering to the BACB Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts.