Renewal during functional communication training

Abstract

Functional communication training (FCT) is one of the most commonly prescribed interventions for the treatment of severe destructive behavior exhibited by individuals with intellectual disabilities. Although highly effective, FCT has been shown to fail in some cases when treatment is introduced into the child's typical environment. Basic and translational research on renewal provides a model for studying the relapse of destructive behavior following successful response to treatment in clinic settings using FCT. In the present study, we evaluated whether relapse of destructive behavior could be attributed to the discriminative control of the home context, which was historically correlated with reinforcement for destructive behavior. We implemented baseline contingencies in the home setting with caregivers acting as interventionists (i.e., Context A). We then implemented FCT in a treatment clinic with trained therapists (i.e., Context B). Finally, we introduced FCT in the home setting with caregivers implementing the treatment procedures (i.e., return to Context A). For three of four participants we observed the relapse of destructive behavior consistent with operant renewal. We discuss the implications of these findings with respect to strategies designed to promote generalization of FCT across settings during the treatment of severe destructive behavior.

A nonsequential approach to the study of operant renewal: a reverse translation

“…If differences do exist, they are likely to be small, and it is of greater importance to acknowledge that renewal is a veritable phenomenon whether studied in the standard manner or in the concurrent‐operant nonsequential manner as proposed in the present study. The results of the present study also suggest that examining variables relevant to treatment relapse in applied settings using the intensive outpatient model as described by Saini et al () is an appropriate method for studying renewal with accuracy. That is, alternation between home and clinic settings as commonly occurs during treatment of problem behavior is unlikely to mitigate or magnify renewal.…”

“…Although the effects observed by Saini et al (2018) were robust, the authors noted a shortcoming of studying renewal in applied settings. Namely, due to practical constraints, it is impossible to keep participants in isolated contexts and study renewal in the traditional sequential manner (i.e., introducing each context sequentially) as is done in the animal laboratory.…”

Extinction of instrumental (operant) learning: interference, varieties of context, and mechanisms of contextual control

“…Although R1 is suppressed by this DRA treatment, it can recover (resurge) when reinforcers for R2 are then omitted (e.g., Leitenberg, Rawson, & Bath, 1970). Resurgence is, of course, more evidence that DRA does not produce permanent behavior change (see also Saini et al, 2018). Recall that DRA treatments are widely used in the treatment of problem behaviors in individuals with autism or deveopmental disabilities; the implication of resurgence is that the response may reappear when reinforcement of the alternative behavior is merely discontinued.…”

Further evaluation of a nonsequential approach to studying operant renewal

“…Basic and translational research underscores some challenges that practitioners may encounter when transitioning treatment into naturalistic settings. That is, changes to the context in which extinction took place may result in relapse of previously eliminated behavior (see Bouton, Todd, Vurbic, & Winterbauer, ; Bouton, Winterbauer, & Todd, ; Kelley, Liddon, Ribeiro, Greif, & Podlesnik, ; Saini, Sullivan, Baxter, DeRosa, & Roane, ; for review, see Podlesnik, Kelley, Jiminez‐Gomez, & Bouton, ). This form of relapse is termed “renewal,” and a thorough understanding of factors that affect renewal may critically inform efforts to ensure long‐term maintenance of behavioral outcomes that are produced in clinical settings.…”