Differential reinforcement of low rates

DRL reduces rate while preserving the response

The response still earns reinforcement when it meets the schedule. The aim is a lower or better-spaced pattern, unlike procedures designed to eliminate a response entirely.

Examples sometimes include rapid eating, repetitive checking, or high-frequency bids for interaction when the response itself remains valid and safe. The person’s priorities and the functional need served by the response should guide the decision.

The BACB BCBA Test Content Outline, 6th edition covers differential reinforcement, reinforcement schedules, assessment-based intervention, client preferences, and data-based modification. It is examination content, rather than approval of DRL for a case.

Three arrangements answer different needs

Full-session DRL delivers reinforcement when total responding stays at or below a criterion during the session. Interval DRL applies a criterion within smaller intervals. Spaced-responding DRL reinforces a response only after a minimum interresponse time.

Choose the arrangement according to the desired distribution, measurement capacity, and response. A full-session total can hide bursts. Spaced responding focuses directly on time between responses but requires accurate timing.

A fictional discussion example

Maya is a fictional student who wants to contribute during a discussion without losing track of peers’ comments. She chooses a target of up to four contributions during a twenty-minute group, with an accessible note space for ideas she wants to save.

Across five baseline groups, Maya contributes 9, 8, 10, 7, and 9 times. Under a collaboratively designed full-session DRL criterion of four, she meets the criterion in 4 of 6 groups. She reports that five of six groups feel easier to follow, and staff respond to every help request regardless of the DRL count.

The small example shows a rate criterion and person-reported outcome. It cannot isolate the DRL contingency because note-taking, practice, peer behavior, and time changed together.

Confirm that lower is actually better

Ask what harm or interference comes from the current rate and whether an environmental change could solve the problem. A crowded schedule, unclear turns, inaccessible materials, or slow partner response may create the pattern.

Avoid using DRL to suppress enthusiasm, harmless self-regulation, cultural communication style, requests for help, reports of pain, AAC use, or dissent. A behavior that signals unmet need may call for faster response from the environment.

Set the criterion from evidence

Use representative baseline data, client preference, safety, and contextual requirements. An initial criterion should be attainable and should preserve sufficient access to the outcome served by the behavior.

State the session length, response definition, criterion, reinforcer, delivery timing, reset rule, and progression rule. Review gradual changes with the person. Sharp thinning can weaken the response or evoke distress.

Assess function and teach useful options

DRL changes a rate contingency. It may leave the reason for responding untouched. Assess what the response produces and whether another accessible response, schedule, environmental support, or freely available resource better meets that need.

In a small study of three children, Austin and Bevan used full-session DRL for requests for teacher attention, set criteria from baseline and teacher recommendations, and reported reductions plus teacher acceptability. The study does not establish that reducing requests is appropriate for another learner.

Measure the whole arrangement

Report response count and time, eligible sessions, criterion met, reinforcer delivered as planned, alternative responses, partner availability, client experience, and any unwanted effects. Keep sessions that miss the criterion in the denominator.

If six sessions are due and four meet criterion, report 4 of 6. Reporting four successful sessions alone hides exposure. Also show whether reinforcement was delivered on every qualifying session.

Review fit and fade carefully

A group-contingency DRL study describes the schedule types and notes implementation considerations in classrooms. Group arrangements add fairness and peer-impact questions. Individual results can disappear inside a group total.

At review, ask whether the behavior remains functional at the lower rate, whether the person prefers the arrangement, and whether natural supports can sustain the outcome. Pause or redesign if distress, lost communication, unsafe delay, or an access problem emerges.

Plan for missed criteria

Describe what happens when the criterion is missed. The person should retain ordinary support and a clear explanation. Avoid public scoreboards, loss of already earned items, or escalating requirements that turn a reinforcement plan into a punitive experience.

Review close misses for shaping the criterion. A session with five responses under a four-response limit can show progress from a baseline of ten. Reinforce other meaningful gains according to the plan while keeping the DRL calculation accurate.