Evaluation of multiple schedules with naturally occurring and therapist-arranged discriminative stimuli following functional communication training.

Many studies have shown that (a) functional communication training (FCT) is effective for reducing problem behavior, and (b) multiple schedules can facilitate reinforcer schedule thinning during FCT. Most studies tha have used multiple schedules with FCT have included therapist-arranged stimuli (e.g., colored cards) as the discriminative stimuli (S(D) s), but recently, researchers have evaluated similar multiple-schedule training procedures with naturally occurring S(D) s (e.g., overt therapist behavior). The purposes of the current study were to compare the effects of arranged and naturally occurring S(D) s directly during (a) acquisition of discriminated functional communication responses (FCRs) and (b) generalization of discriminated FCRs when we introduced the multiple schedules in novel contexts in which the naturally occurring stimuli were either relatively easy or difficult to discriminate. Results showed that (a) 2 of 3 participants acquired discriminated responding of the FCR more rapidly with arranged than with naturally occurring stimuli, (b) 2 of 3 participants showed resurgence of problem behavior , and (c) 2 of 3 participants showed greater generalization of discriminated responding to novel contexts with arranged stimuli than with naturally occurring stimuli. We discuss these results relative to the conditions under which naturally occurring and arranged S(D) s may promote rapid and generalized treatment gains.

Using multiple schedules during functional communication training to promote rapid transfer of treatment effects.

Multiple schedules with signaled periods of reinforcement and extinction have been used to thin reinforcement schedules during functional communication training (FCT) to make the intervention more practical for parents and teachers. We evaluated whether these signals would also facilitate rapid transfer of treatment effects across settings and therapists. With 2 children, we conducted FCT in the context of mixed (baseline) and multiple (treatment) schedules introduced across settings or therapists using a multiple baseline design. Results indicated that when the multiple schedules were introduced, the functional communication response came under rapid discriminative control, and problem behavior remained at near-zero rates. We extended these findings with another individual by using a more traditional baseline in which problem behavior produced reinforcement. Results replicated those of the previous participants and showed rapid reductions in problem behavior when multiple schedules were implemented across settings.

Decreasing excessive functional communication responses while treating destructive behavior using response restriction.

Functional communication training (FCT) is an established treatment for destructive behavior that missucceeds in about 37% of cases when the reinforcement schedule for the functional communication response (FCR) is thinned using multiples schedules (mult FCT; Hagopian, Boelter, & Jarmolowicz, 2011). In this investigation, we evaluated the use of response restriction FCT (RR FCT) in a cohort of patients with poorly differentiated responding of the FCR during mult FCT. Results showed that (a) RR FCT maintained high rates of correct FCRs during the reinforcement component of RR FCT without increasing destructive behavior; (b) children displayed highly discriminated FCRs when an FCR card and a control card were simultaneously available during the reinforcement component of RR FCT; and (c) near-zero rates of destructive behavior were observed during the last five sessions of the terminal reinforcement schedule. Results are discussed relative to differences between mult FCT and RR FCT and successive and simultaneous discriminations.

Test-specific control conditions for functional analyses.

Most functional analyses of problem behavior include a common condition (play or noncontingent reinforcement) as a control for both positive and negative reinforcement. However, test-specific conditions that control for each potential source of reinforcement may be beneficial occasionally. We compared responding during alone, ignore, play, and differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) control conditions for individuals whose problem behavior was maintained by positive or negative reinforcement. Results showed that all of the conditions were effective controls for problem behavior maintained by positive reinforcement; however, the DRO condition was consistently ineffective as a control for problem behavior maintained by negative reinforcement. Implications for the design of functional analyses and future research are discussed.

Evaluation of the divided attention condition during functional analyses.

A common condition included in most functional analyses (FAs) is the attention condition, in which the therapist ignores the client by engaging in a solitary activity (antecedent event) but delivers attention to the client contingent on problem behavior (consequent event). The divided attention condition is similar, except that the antecedent event consists of the therapist conversing with an adult confederate. We compared the typical and divided attention conditions to determine whether behavior in general (Study 1) and problem behavior in particular (Study 2) were more sensitive to one of the test conditions. Results showed that the divided attention condition resulted in faster acquisition or more efficient FA results for 2 of 9 subjects, suggesting that the divided attention condition could be considered a preferred condition when resources are available.

Functional analysis screening for problem behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement.

A common finding in previous research is that problem behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement continues to occur in the alone condition of a functional analysis (FA), whereas behavior maintained by social reinforcement typically is extinguished. Thus, the alone condition may represent an efficient screening procedure when maintenance by automatic reinforcement is suspected. We conducted a series of 5-min alone (or no-interaction) probes for 30 cases of problem behavior and compared initial predictions of maintenance or extinction to outcomes obtained in subsequent FAs. Results indicated that data from the screening procedure accurately predicted that problem behavior was maintained by automatic reinforcement in 21 of 22 cases and by social reinforcement in 7 of 8 cases. Thus, results of the screening accurately predicted the function of problem behavior (social vs. automatic reinforcement) in 28 of 30 cases.