To assess renewal across context changes, define Devon's treatment and test contexts, response class, baseline and treatment histories, continuing treatment contingency, context change, recurrence timing, cues, partner and setting integrity, access, health, direct experience, and alternative explanations. Renewal concerns recurrence with a context change while treatment remains in effect. Missing supports, new demands, or treatment discontinuation require different descriptions.

Version the contexts in observable terms

Describe place, people, machines, cues, noise, lighting, timing, materials, and support access. Context is a collection of features rather than a location name alone.

Verify that treatment continues

Record the same treatment components, prompts, reinforcement, availability signals, ordinary supports, and partner actions in the new context. Missing components weaken a renewal claim.

Measure recurrence and exposure

Use the same response definition and opportunity rule across contexts. Show raw counts, time or opportunity denominators, invalid events, and how much treatment exposure occurred before the test.

Ask Devon which features changed

Direct accessible feedback can identify display, noise, effort, uncertainty, or preference differences that aggregate context labels miss.

Use this sequence to assess renewal

Map Devon's contexts, preserve the phase history, verify continuing treatment, measure recurrence and integrity, repair access, inspect alternatives, and bound the context claim.

Build Devon's renewal context comparison

Create one versioned renewal context comparison for the community laundry payment routine. Include Devon's priority, response classes, phases, contexts, treatment versions, reinforcement, exposure, integrity, access, health, recurrence timing, safety action, direct experience, invalidity, missingness, withdrawal, candidate process, alternative explanations, design limits, decision, qualified owner, correction, and reassessment trigger. Store only decision-relevant information with role-limited access.

Validate Devon's recurrence evidence

Reproduce Devon's 8/12 baseline, 1/16 treatment, and 6/12 new-context result. In the new context, correct implementation is 9/12, or 75%; two supports are absent and one integrity record is missing. The response and integrity totals are not cross-tabulated, so the rate of repeated checking during correctly implemented opportunities cannot be calculated. Do not infer it by combining 6/12 with 9/12. Verify context cues, machines, treatment version, reinforcement, partners, access, health, direct report, exposure, recurrence timing, and repair. Keep renewal and transfer-failure interpretations separate.

Connect Devon's evidence to a decision

Devon's team repairs the visual display and partner implementation before interpreting the context effect. If recurrence remains after the same treatment components are available, the renewal hypothesis gains relevance. The report can still describe context-specific transfer needs without proving a relapse mechanism.

Work through Devon's example

Devon repeatedly checks a payment receipt in 8/12 baseline opportunities at laundromat A and 1/16 during treatment there. At laundromat B, the same support plan is scheduled, and repeated checking occurs in 6/12 opportunities. Partners deliver the plan correctly in 9/12, or 75%; two visual supports are absent and one opportunity has no integrity record. Because the six response events are not linked to those integrity states, the record cannot show how often checking occurred under intact implementation. The return is compatible with renewal and with transfer failure. Preserve every planned and valid unit, response code, phase and context version, treatment component, reinforcement event, exposure, integrity result, access and health state, safety response, withdrawal, direct report, system failure, repair, correction, and unresolved item. This fictional example demonstrates one assessment control. It offers no diagnosis, person trait, universal relapse estimate, treatment effect, legal conclusion, coverage decision, payment promise, or outcome guarantee for Devon.

Address Devon's main interpretation risk

A new location changes machines, lighting, noise, staff, wait time, and payment prompts together. Calling 6/12 renewal without the 9/12 integrity and support gaps overstates the evidence. It also obscures Devon's report that one receipt display is hard to read. Review response and phase definitions, treatment history, reinforcement, exposure, context, integrity, access, health, partner behavior, direct experience, alternative explanations, authority, and design strength separately. A convincing graph cannot repair an unsafe, inaccessible, unwanted, or historically unsupported recurrence assessment.

Keep treatment scope and authority clear for Devon

For Devon's renewal context comparison, the CASP public summary supplies high-level ABA behavioral-health-treatment scope for autistic people, with licensed detail outside this page. The current BACB Ethics Code addresses competence, client involvement, consent and assent when applicable, medical needs, risk, data, documentation, evaluation, discontinuation, and transition for covered people. The BACB outline supplies examination content. These sources create no individualized relapse protocol or practice authority for Devon.

Distinguish early increase from recurrence for Devon

The historical Lerman and Iwata analysis reviewed extinction data and found early increases under a defined burst criterion in a minority of reviewed data sets. An extinction burst describes a time-linked early increase after extinction begins, whereas Devon's later recurrence question requires its own phase history. The study offers no universal prevalence estimate for current care, no safety authorization, and no prediction for the community laundry payment routine.

Use alternative-reinforcement and communication literature within scope for Devon

Athens and Vollmer evaluated differential reinforcement without extinction with seven children and varied dimensions such as immediacy, duration, and quality. The Tiger, Hanley, and Bruzek review discusses FCT assessment, response selection, partner response, schedule thinning, and related risks. These sources support careful history and delivery measurement for Devon; they supply no universal schedule, delay, consequence, or relapse outcome.

Use renewal evidence cautiously for Devon

The Podlesnik renewal review synthesizes basic and translational work on recurrence with context change while extinction or treatment contingencies remain. Much of that evidence comes from controlled laboratory arrangements. Understanding and Reacting to Relapse discusses practice-facing context and recurrence considerations. For Devon, define people, places, cues, treatment continuity, access, and integrity before applying renewal language.

Preserve broad relapse limits and communication access for Devon

Relapse and Its Mitigation distinguishes several recurrence histories and discusses mitigation concepts. It organizes hypotheses rather than proving which process occurred for Devon. ASHA's AAC portal says AAC users should always have access to communication tools or devices. Follow governing sources and preserve Devon's communication, health care, food, water, bathroom use, mobility, rest, relationships, safety, and emergency help throughout review.

Choose Devon's next bounded action

Devon chooses an accessible receipt setting and asks to practice once at laundromat B with the familiar support before any further comparison. Record the qualified owner, source evidence, effective date, current phase and treatment version, ordinary supports, access and health state, implementation check, accessible explanation, disagreement route, and reassessment trigger. Preserve the earlier record when responses, people, settings, systems, schedules, health, or priorities change. A repaired arrangement creates a dated phase rather than an error in Devon's prior performance.

Close Devon's relapse review

Review the renewal context comparison with Devon, the qualified behavior analyst, relevant partners, access owners, and specialists named in the manifest. Confirm that observed recurrence remains separate from resurgence, renewal, an extinction burst, treatment drift, access failure, health change, and treatment effect; every denominator is reproducible; AAC and basic access remain protected; urgent needs received action; and conclusions stay bounded to the supported history. Keep this page draft and noindex until every required review is complete.

Related resources

Sources