Effects of continuous and intermittent reinforcement for problem behavior during functional communication training

We evaluated the effectiveness of functional communication training (FCT) in reducing problem behavior and in strengthening alternative behavior when FCT was implemented without extinction. Following the completion of functional analyses in which social-positive reinforcement was identified as the maintaining variable for 5 participants' self-injurious behavior (SIB) and aggression, the participants were first exposed to FCT in which both problem behavior and alternative behavior were reinforced continuously (i.e., on fixed-ratio [FR] 1 schedules). During subsequent FCT conditions, the schedule of reinforcement for problem behavior was made more intermittent (e.g., FR 2, FR 3, FR 5, etc.), whereas alternative behavior was always reinforced according to an FR 1 schedule. Results showed that 1 participant's problem behavior decreased and alternative behavior increased during FCT when both behaviors were reinforced on FR 1 schedules. The remaining 4 participants shifted response allocation from problem to alternative behavior as the schedule of reinforcement for problem behavior became more intermittent. These results suggest that individuals might acquire alternative responses during FCT in spite of inconsistencies in the application of extinction, although even small errors in reinforcement may compromise treatment effects.     

Providing noncontingent,alternative, functional reinforcers during delays following functional communication training

Functional Communication Training (FCT) involves arranging extinction for problem behavior and reinforcement for a more desirable, functionally equivalent, communicative response (FCR). Although effective under ideal arrangements, the introduction of delays to reinforcement following the FCR can result in increased problem behavior. Austin and Tiger (2015) showed that for individuals whose problem behavior was sensitive to multiple sources of reinforcement, providing access to alternative, functional reinforcers during delays mitigated this increase in problem behavior during delay fading. The current study replicated the procedures of Austin and Tiger with 2 individuals displaying multiply controlled problem behavior. Providing alternative functional reinforcers reduced problem behavior during 10-min delays for both participants without requiring delay fading.     

Schedule thinning following communication training: using competing stimuli to enhance tolerance to decrements in reinforcer density

Functional communication training (FCT) is a widely used treatment for individuals with developmental disabilities who exhibit severe behavior problems. One inherent challenge of employing FCT as a treatment in the community is that reinforcement for appropriate communication cannot always be immediate or even possible in some circumstances. Of the few studies that have incorporated some form of schedule thinning for communication, most have reported disruption of communication or increases in problem behavior when the schedule of reinforcement is thinned. In the current study, we compared FCT with extinction to FCT with extinction and access to competing stimuli. After conducting a functional analysis, a competing stimulus assessment was performed to identify stimuli that produce reinforcement that ostensibly competes with reinforcement that maintains problem behavior. It was hypothesized that FCT with competing stimuli would result in more stable reductions in problem behavior during schedule thinning, which would ultimately result in quicker achievement of the treatment goal (low levels of problem behavior under the terminal reinforcement schedule for communication) than FCT without competing stimuli. Results confirmed this hypothesis.     

A preliminary investigation on improving functional communication training by mitigating resurgence of destructive behavior

Despite the effectiveness and widespread use of functional communication training (FCT), resurgence of destructive behavior can occur if the functional communication response (FCR) contacts a challenge, such as lapses in treatment integrity. We evaluated a method to mitigate resurgence by conducting FCT using a multiple schedule of reinforcement prior to extinction. After functional analyses of 2 boys’ destructive behavior and treatment with FCT (Study 1), we compared levels of resurgence during an extinction challenge either after a typical FCT sequence or after exposure to schedule thinning in the context of a multiple‐schedule arrangement (Study 2). Results for both participants suggested that schedule thinning using discriminative stimuli in a multiple schedule mitigated the resurgence of destructive behavior.     

EVALUATION OF THE “CONTROL OVER REINFORCEMENT” COMPONENT IN FUNCTIONAL COMMUNICATION TRAINING

The effectiveness of functional communication training (FCT) as a treatment for behavior disorders has been attributed to a number of variables, one of which is the individual's ability to exert control over the delivery of reinforcement. We evaluated this component of FCT by exposing individuals to conditions in which their behavior either did or did not affect the delivery of reinforcement. Three adults with mental retardation who engaged in self-injurious behavior (SIB) participated. Following a functional analysis of their SIB, the effects of FCT were compared to those of noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) in a multielement design. The amount of reinforcement during both conditions was equated by yoking the schedule of reinforcement during NCR sessions to that in effect during FCT sessions. Results indicated that FCT and NCR were equally effective in reducing the SIB of all participants and suggest that control over reinforcement delivery may not affect the degree to which FCT produces behavioral suppression. However, a different benefit of FCT was evident in the results: More consistent increases in the alternative response were observed during the FCT condition than during the NCR condition.     

Utility of extinction-induced response variability for the selection of mands

Functional communication training (FCT; Carr & Durand, 1985) is a commonly used differential reinforcement procedure for replacing problem behavior with socially acceptable alternative responses. Most studies in the FCT literature consist of demonstrations of the maintenance of responding when various treatment components (e.g., extinction, punishment) are present and absent (e.g., Fisher et al., 1993; Wacker et al., 1990). Relatively little research on FCT has (a) evaluated the conditions under which alternative responses are acquired or (b) described procedures with technological precision. Thus, additional research on a cogent technology for response acquisition appears to be warranted. In the current study, we evaluated the efficacy of exposing problem behavior to extinction for inducing response variability as a tool for selecting an alternative response during FCT. Once participants engaged in appropriate alternative responses, the reinforcer identified in the functional analysis as maintaining problem behavior was delivered contingent on the alternative behavior. Results showed that exposing problem behavior to extinction was a useful method for producing alternative behaviors during FCT.     

Signaled alternative reinforcement and the persistence of operant behavior

Differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) is a treatment designed to eliminate problem behavior by reinforcing an alternative behavior at a higher rate. Availability of alternative reinforcement may be signaled, as with Functional Communication Training, or unsignaled. Whether or not alternative reinforcement is signaled could influence both the rate and persistence of problem behavior. The present study investigated whether signaling the availability of alternative reinforcement affects the rate and persistence of a concurrently available target response with pigeons. Three components of a multiple concurrent schedule arranged equal reinforcement rates for target responding. Two of the components also arranged equal reinforcement rates for an alternative response. In one DRA component, a discrete stimulus signaled the availability of response‐contingent alternative reinforcement by changing the keylight color upon reinforcement availability. In the other DRA component, availability of alternative reinforcement was not signaled. Target responding was most persistent in the unsignaled DRA component when disrupted by satiation, free food presented between components, and extinction, relative to the signaled DRA and control components. These findings suggest the discrete stimulus functionally separated the availability of alternative reinforcement from the discriminative stimuli governing target responding. These findings provide a novel avenue to explore in translational research assessing whether signaling the availability of alternative reinforcement with DRA treatments reduces the persistence of problem behavior.     

The effects of competing reinforcement schedules on the acquisition of functional communication

The initial efficacy of functional communication training (FCT) was evaluated when problem behavior continued to produce intermittent reinforcement. Results for 2 of 3 participants showed that FCT was most effective when problem behavior was also exposed to extinction, response blocking, or both.     

An evaluation of persistence of treatment effects during long-term treatment of destructive behavior

Eight young children who displayed destructive behavior maintained, at least in part, by negative reinforcement received long‐term functional communication training (FCT). During FCT, the children completed a portion of a task and then touched a communication card attached to a microswitch to obtain brief breaks. Prior to and intermittently throughout FCT, extinction probes were conducted within a withdrawal design in which task completion, manding, and destructive behavior were placed on extinction to evaluate the relative persistence of appropriate and destructive behavior over the course of treatment. FCT continued until appropriate behavior persisted and destructive behavior failed to recur at baseline levels during extinction probes. The completion of FCT was followed by four challenges to the persistence of treatment effects conducted within mixed‐ or multiple‐schedule designs: (a) extended extinction sessions (from 5 to 15 min), (b) introduction of a novel task, (c) removal of the microswitch and communication card, and (d) a mixed schedule of reinforcement in which both appropriate and destructive behavior produced reinforcement. The results showed that although FCT often resulted in quick reductions in destructive behavior and increases in appropriate behavior, destructive behavior often recurred during the extinction probes conducted during the initial treatment. When the effects of treatment persisted during the extinction probes, the remaining challenges to treatment effects resulted in only mild to moderate disruptions in behavior. These results are consistent with the quantitative predictions of behavioral momentum theory and may provide an alternative definition of maintenance as constituting behavioral persistence.     

Comparing the effects of static and dynamic signals during multiple schedules

The extent to which multiple schedules are an effective schedule thinning method following functional communication training (FCT) relies on the control the schedule-correlated stimuli exert over behavior. Thus, the stimuli used to signal the schedule in place (e.g., reinforcement and extinction) in a multiple schedule arrangement require special attention. To date, the majority of the research on multiple schedules has evaluated the use of different arbitrary signals as schedule-correlated stimuli (e.g., poster boards). These signals are considered static as they lack movement. More recently, some studies have successfully used dynamic signals, which include movement or animation, within multiple schedule arrangements. However, the extent to which one type of signal may result in faster stimulus control over behavior has not been evaluated. Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare the use of static and dynamic signals as schedule-correlated stimuli in multiple schedules used within the context of FCT. Four children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder participated in the study. The results suggest that no differences in discriminated manding were observed for three out of four participants. Only dynamic signals resulted in discriminated manding for one participant.     

DOES FUNCTIONAL COMMUNICATION TRAINING COMPETE WITH ONGOING CONTINGENCIES OF REINFORCEMENT? AN ANALYSIS DURING RESPONSE ACQUISITION AND MAINTENANCE

We examined the effectiveness of functional communication training (FCT) in reducing self-injurious behavior (SIB) and in shaping an alternative (communicative) response while SIB continued to be reinforced. Following a functional analysis of 3 individuals' SIB, we attempted to teach an alternative response consisting of a manual sign to each individual, using the reinforcer that maintained SIB. When FCT was implemented without extinction, SIB remained at baseline rates for all participants, and none of the participants acquired the alternative response. When extinction was added to the training procedure, SIB decreased and manual signing increased for all participants. To determine if signing, when established, would compete with SIB when both were reinforced, extinction was then withdrawn. Signing was maintained and SIB occurred at low rates for 2 individuals, but SIB returned to baseline rates for the 3rd individual, necessitating the reimplementation of extinction. These results suggest that it may be difficult to establish alternative behaviors if inappropriate behavior continues to be reinforced, but that, when established, alternative behavior might compete successfully with ongoing contingencies of reinforcement for inappropriate behavior.     

ESTABLISHING DISCRIMINATIVE CONTROL OF RESPONDING USING FUNCTIONAL AND ALTERNATIVE REINFORCERS DURING FUNCTIONAL COMMUNICATION TRAINING

Functional communication training (FCT) is a popular treatment for problem behaviors, but its effectiveness may be compromised when the client emits the target communication response and reinforcement is either delayed or denied. In the current investigation, we trained 2 individuals to emit different communication responses to request (a) the reinforcer for destructive behavior in a given situation (e.g., contingent attention in the attention condition of a functional analysis) and (b) an alternative reinforcer (e.g., toys in the attention condition of a functional analysis). Next, we taught the participants to request each reinforcer in the presence of a different discriminative stimulus (S^D). Then, we evaluated the effects of differential reinforcement of communication (DRC) using the functional and alternative reinforcers and correlated S^Ds, with and without extinction of destructive behavior. During all applications, DRC (in combination with S^Ds that signaled available reinforcers) rapidly reduced destructive behavior to low levels regardless of whether the functional reinforcer or an alternative reinforcer was available or whether reinforcement for destructive behavior was discontinued (i.e., extinction).     

Reinforcement Delay Fading During Differential Reinforcement of Communication: The Effects of Signals on Response Maintenance

Signals during delays to reinforcement may lessen reductions in responding that typically occur when there is a delay between a response and its reinforcer. Sparse applied research has been devoted to understanding the conditions under which responding may be maintained when delays to reinforcement are introduced. We evaluated the extent to which providing signals during delay fading affected responding in the context of differential reinforcement of communication responses. Three individuals were exposed to gradually increasing signaled and unsignaled reinforcement delays in multiple‐schedule and/or withdrawal designs. Results for 2 of 3 participants suggested that (a) the presence of signals facilitated response maintenance under delayed reinforcement and (b) coordinated basic and applied research may advance both conceptual understanding and clinical outcomes of delayed reinforcement.     

Functional communication during signaled reinforcement and/or extinction

Schedule thinning following functional communication training (FCT) can increase treatment feasibility. Multiple‐schedule arrangements are often used in this process; however, the current literature provides little information on the optimum signal arrangements. In the current study, we examined the effects of three signal arrangements (i.e., signaled FR1, signaled EXT, and signaled FR1/EXT) on rates of problem behavior at dense schedule values and during schedule thinning. At all schedule values, signaled FR1/EXT controlled collateral behavior better than did signaled FR1 or signaled EXT. Additionally, for the single signal arrangements, the signaled FR1 was more efficient than the signaled EXT at dense schedules whereas the inverse was true at leaner schedules. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Noncontingent reinforcement without extinction plus differential reinforcement of alternative behavior during treatment of problem behavior

The effects of noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) without extinction during treatment of problem behavior maintained by social positive reinforcement were evaluated for five individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. A continuous NCR schedule was gradually thinned to a fixed‐time 5‐min schedule. If problem behavior increased during NCR schedule thinning, a continuous NCR schedule was reinstated and NCR schedule thinning was repeated with differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) included. Results showed an immediate decrease in all participants’ problem behavior during continuous NCR, and problem behavior maintained at low levels during NCR schedule thinning for three participants. Problem behavior increased and maintained at higher rates during NCR schedule thinning for two other participants; however, the addition of DRA to the intervention resulted in decreased problem behavior and increased mands.     

EVALUATION OF CLIENT PREFERENCE FOR FUNCTION-BASED TREATMENT PACKAGES

Functional communication training (FCT) and noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) are commonly prescribed treatments that are based on the results of a functional analysis. Both treatments involve delivery of the reinforcer that is responsible for the maintenance of destructive behavior. One major difference between the two treatment procedures is that client responding determines reinforcement delivery with FCT (e.g., reinforcement of communication is delivered on a fixed-ratio 1 schedule) but not with NCR (e.g., reinforcement is delivered on a fixed-time 30-s schedule). In the current investigation, FCT and NCR were equally effective in reducing 2 participants' destructive behavior that was sensitive to attention as reinforcement. After the treatment analysis, the participants' relative preference for each treatment was evaluated using a modified concurrent-chains procedure. Both participants demonstrated a preference for the FCT procedure. The results are discussed in terms of treatment efficacy and preference for control over when reinforcement is delivered. In addition, a method is demonstrated in which clients with developmental disabilities can participate in selecting treatments that are designed to reduce their destructive behavior.     

A comparison of accumulated and distributed reinforcement periods with children exhibiting escape-maintained problem behavior

Differential reinforcement is a common treatment for escape-maintained problem behavior in which compliance is reinforced on a fixed-ratio (FR) 1 schedule with brief access to positive and/or negative reinforcement. Recent research suggests some individuals prefer to complete longer work requirements culminating in prolonged (i.e. accumulated) reinforcement periods relative to brief (i.e. distributed) periods, but prolonged work exposure may evoke problem behavior and prevent compliance from contacting reinforcement when treating escape-maintained problem behavior. We exposed 3 children with escape-maintained problem behavior to both distributed (FR 1 resulting in 30 s of reinforcement) and accumulated (FR 15 resulting in 7.5 min of reinforcement) arrangements to compare their efficacy in maintaining low levels of problem behavior. We then assessed participants' preferences for these conditions in a concurrent-chains arrangement. Accumulated-reinforcement arrangements did not occasion additional problem behavior, but rather resulted in consistently lower levels of problem behavior for 2 of 3 participants. Participants demonstrated idiosyncratic preferences.     

A comparison of dense-to-lean and fixed lean schedules of alternative reinforcement and extinction

Behavior-reduction interventions typically employ dense schedules of alternative reinforcement in conjunction with operant extinction for problem behavior. After problem behavior is reduced in the initial treatment stages, schedule thinning is routinely conducted to make the intervention more practical in natural environments. In the current investigation, two methods for thinning alternative reinforcement schedules were compared for 3 clients who exhibited severe problem behavior. In the dense-to-lean (DTL) condition, reinforcement was delivered on relatively dense schedules (using noncontingent reinforcement for 1 participant and functional communication training for 2 participants), followed by systematic schedule thinning to progressively leaner schedules. During the fixed lean (FL) condition, reinforcement was delivered on lean schedules (equivalent to the terminal schedule of the DTL condition). The FL condition produced a quicker attainment of individual treatment goals for 2 of the 3 participants. The results are discussed in terms of the potential utility of using relatively lean schedules at treatment outset.     

NONCONTINGENT REINFORCEMENT AS TREATMENT FOR SEVERE PROBLEM BEHAVIOR: SOME PROCEDURAL VARIATIONS

Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) as a treatment for problem behavior has typically included (a) continuous access to reinforcers at the onset of treatment and (b) extinction. We extended research on NCR by conducting a three-phase preliminary investigation of these components. In Phase 1, a functional analysis showed that the problem behavior of 3 participants with developmental disabilities was maintained by tangible positive reinforcement. In Phase 2, treatment started with the initial NCR interval based on the latency to the first problem behavior during baseline. In Phase 3, treatment consisted of NCR without extinction to determine whether extinction was an essential treatment component. Results showed that the initial NCR schedule based on latency (Phase 2) and NCR without extinction (Phase 3) were effective for reducing rates of problem behavior compared with baseline. Findings are discussed regarding the initial schedule of reinforcement and extinction as components of NCR.     

Relative preference for distinct reinforcers maintaining destructive behavior

The literature offers few recommendations for sequencing exposure to treatment conditions with individuals with multiply maintained destructive behavior. Identifying relative preference for the functional reinforcers maintaining destructive behavior may be one means of guiding that decision. The present study presents a preliminary attempt at developing a robust relative preference and reinforcer assessment for individuals with multiply maintained destructive behavior. Guided and free-choice trials were implemented in which participants chose between two multiple-schedule arrangements, each of which programmed signaled periods of isolated reinforcer availability and unavailability. Consistent participant choice and responding during free-choice trials was then used to thin the corresponding schedule of reinforcement. The results demonstrated a strong preference for one of the two functional reinforcers for all four participants, yet preferences differed across participants and were not well predicted by responding in prior analyses.