TL;DR: A preferred item isn’t always a reinforcer. Motivating operations — establishing operations and abolishing operations — determine whether a consequence will actually increase behavior in the moment. Practitioners who account for MOs in session planning get better data and fewer dead-end trials.
What Are Motivating Operations?
Michael (1982) introduced the term “motivating operation” to describe environmental variables that temporarily alter the value of a consequence and the frequency of behavior that produces that consequence. There are two types:
- Establishing operation (EO): An antecedent condition that increases the reinforcing effectiveness of a stimulus and increases the frequency of behavior that has produced that stimulus in the past.
- Abolishing operation (AO): An antecedent condition that decreases the reinforcing effectiveness of a stimulus and decreases the frequency of behavior that has produced that stimulus in the past.
The clearest example most practitioners recognize is food deprivation. A learner who hasn’t eaten since breakfast will work hard for a piece of pretzel. The same learner five minutes after lunch may not pick it up off the table. The pretzel hasn’t changed. The motivating operation has.
Why MOs Matter in Clinical Sessions
Most ABA training emphasizes identifying reinforcers through preference assessments and delivering them contingently. That’s the right foundation — but preference assessments are snapshots. They capture what a learner values under those conditions, at that time of day, in that level of deprivation.
In session, MOs are constantly in flux. Consider these common scenarios:
- A learner worked for tablet access all morning. By early afternoon, satiation may have set in, reducing tablet’s reinforcing value regardless of what the preference assessment showed.
- A learner who has been in a small waiting room for 30 minutes may be in an EO state for movement or proprioceptive input — making sensory breaks more potent than any tangible.
- A learner who just had an active recess may be temporarily less responsive to physical play as a reinforcer.
When practitioners don’t account for these shifts, they often attribute low responding to “behavior” or “motivation problems” when the actual issue is a satiation or deprivation state that could have been anticipated.
Conditioned motivating operations (CMOs) extend this concept further. A warning stimulus — a sound, a timer, a verbal announcement — can acquire the ability to alter reinforcer value without direct deprivation or satiation. BCBAs who work with learners with challenging behavior will recognize this immediately: the announcement “it’s almost time to clean up” can function as a CMO-surrogate (CMO-S), suddenly spiking the value of escape from the upcoming demand. Understanding that function is essential for writing antecedent-focused behavior support plans.
Five Practical Ways to Use MOs in Session
Knowing the MO concept is table stakes. Applying it during a live session is the skill.
1. Take two minutes to observe before the first trial. Has your learner been in a restricted environment? Did they eat recently? Have they had access to the reinforcers you plan to use during this session? A brief pre-session observation isn’t formal assessment — it’s pattern recognition that costs two minutes and can prevent 20 wasted trials.
2. Rotate your reinforcer pool. Running the same preferred item for an entire session is a fast path to satiation. Draw from three to five items identified in a recent preference assessment and watch for satiation indicators: reduced reach latency, leaving items on the table, turning away, or decreased response rates. When you see those signs, swap.
3. Use brief removal to re-establish reinforcer value. If your learner has had heavy access to a preferred item in the first half of session, pull it mid-session and reintroduce it in the second half. Brief removal functions as an EO, restoring the item’s potency. This is particularly useful for activities like tablet access or preferred play materials.
4. Document MO states in your session notes. Standard data sheets rarely include antecedent condition fields, but a brief note — “satiation for crackers apparent around trial 12” or “learner arrived appearing tired and low energy; social reinforcement less effective than usual” — gives supervisors and analysts richer context when reviewing data patterns. Over time, these notes reveal predictable MO cycles for individual learners.
5. Analyze CMOs when writing BIPs. For learners with challenging behavior, look carefully at whether warning stimuli, transition cues, or specific staff behaviors have acquired CMO function. If a three-minute warning before a preferred activity reliably produces an increase in problem behavior, that warning has likely become a CMO-S. BIPs that target antecedent modification need to account for this — otherwise the modification shifts the warning signal, not the underlying operation.
How Kipr Helps
Understanding motivating operations conceptually is the easy part. Applying that understanding in the moment — mid-session, when a reinforcer stops working and you need to quickly recognize why and adjust — is a different skill. It requires reps in conditions that produce the stress and ambiguity of real sessions.
Kipr’s AI simulation platform lets BCBAs and RBTs practice exactly this kind of in-session clinical judgment. Run scenarios where reinforcer effectiveness shifts mid-session. Practice recognizing the signals, adjusting your approach, and documenting your observations — before those decisions carry real consequences. That’s the premise: build the judgment before you need it.
Join the Kipr waitlist for early access.