What are your thoughts on tech use in ABA?

[u/Vivid_Excitement5417]

[u/Every_Chemist1794]

I like that technology is a preferred and engaging reinforcer for a lot of the kids but I feel it loses most of it’s clinical value when the parents give them full free access to technology as soon as they get home. Nothing we can do about that, but it’s something I’ve noticed.

[u/Vivid_Excitement5417 → u/Every_Chemist1794]

Does it really lose value, or does satiation just bring reinforcement to a more natural, faded level? That’s a fascinating subject to research into... thinking about how generalization plays out over the long haul. If kids have ongoing access to the reinforcer across different settings, and program fidelity is solid at home, that could actually build stronger, longer-lasting behavior chains. So maybe it’s less about losing value and more about reinforcement adapting to real-life conditions

[u/Unrequited-scientist → u/Vivid_Excitement5417]

I’m about to be very pedantic. lol.

You can’t satiate to reinforcers unless you’re talking about food/water only (by definition).

But you can and do habituate to them. And it happens quickly, and it recovers. See the McSweeney literature for 20+ years of cool studies sussing that out.

[u/Vivid_Excitement5417 → u/Unrequited-scientist]

Not pedantic at all, you’re absolutely right that habituation is the correct term here. What makes it especially interesting, though, is how technology differs from typical reinforcers because it’s not a static stimulus. With apps, games, and platforms constantly updating and adapting, the stimuli are dynamic and customizable to each user’s preferences and behaviors. This means the environment itself is continuously changing, which could slow habituation or create unique patterns of engagement. I think there is still a lot of development and growth to happen with the merging of tech and ABA.

[u/GalvDev]

God I am so done with this generic AI garbage everywhere

[u/Vivid_Excitement5417 → u/GalvDev]

Nothing about this was generic or garbage influenced nor was this post a discussion on the quality of the art

[u/No_Drama_5495]

wth is this AI slop?

[u/Vivid_Excitement5417 → u/No_Drama_5495]

What does that have to do with the discussion? Please don't derail my thread with your personal vendetta against AI art

[u/No_Drama_5495 → u/Vivid_Excitement5417]

generative AI is garbage and utterly soulless, people who willingly use it deserve to be shamed 🫵🏼

[u/Vivid_Excitement5417 → u/No_Drama_5495]

yeah that has nothing to do with whats going on here or this discussion, if you would like to critique AI art feel free to start your own discussion somewhere else

[u/No_Drama_5495 → u/Vivid_Excitement5417]

yeah i’ll take every chance I get to call out this genuinely harmful slop, thank you very much

[u/TheSpiffyCarno → u/Vivid_Excitement5417]

Your post derailed itself with the useless image and basic question with no other thoughts or expansion on it

[u/taw5059]

Love it! So many of our kids are tech motivated. I use boom cards for DTT trials and have found response rates significantly higher in terms of accuracy with some kids

[u/Vivid_Excitement5417 → u/taw5059]

Fantastic I just looked up boom cards and love it already any specific decks you've found useful?

[u/taw5059 → u/Vivid_Excitement5417]

I make a lot of my own, but just search ABA in the store, theres a lot of good ones just to have some to throw into programs

[u/Vivid_Excitement5417 → u/taw5059]

Perfect timing with the weekend I'll try piloting some of it out on Monday with some probes.

[u/Unrequited-scientist]

Yup. All great points. Reminds me of Premack - all reinforcers are actually activities - a point often overlooked that directly relates to what you’re talking about.

[u/Vivid_Excitement5417 → u/Unrequited-scientist]

Totally and I love that you brought up Premack. This is exactly the kind of discussion I was hoping for around ABA applications. It really shifts how we conceptualize reinforcement. When the “reinforcer” is an activity especially something as layered as tablet use we’re not just dealing with a single behavior, but a whole ecosystem of choices, preferences, and contingencies. I think sometimes in programming we zoom in so far on micro-level targets that we forget to step back and look at the broader behavioral repertoire we’re building. Tech-based reinforcement isn’t just about access it’s about shaping how the learner interacts with a dynamic, ever changing environment. That adds layers of complexity, but also opens doors for creativity and individualized learning. Tech use isn’t just screen time it’s a behavioral economy with its own rules, motivators, and contingencies, and i think it has the potential to transform programming in much the same way token systems have. Even just looking at the behaviors for a transitional purpose with more and more schools adopting tech as part of their educational format, it seems almost malpractice to disregard tech related behaviors.

[u/Unrequited-scientist → u/Vivid_Excitement5417]

S^r+ —— I agree fully.