Sustaining behavior reduction by transitioning the topography of the functional communication response

Abstract

When a functional communication response (FCR) can be reliably occasioned, destructive behavior tends to be lower. However, the form of FCR may affect the durability of functional communication training, as missing FCR materials may promote resurgence. Experiment 1 demonstrated that resurgence of target responding was lower when a vocal FCR remained available but was placed on extinction compared to when a card-based FCR was unavailable. Experiment 2 replicated the finding that initiating treatment with a card FCR produced less target responding than when initiating treatment with a vocal FCR. We then evaluated a set of procedures for transitioning the card FCR to the previously unlearned vocal FCR. These findings suggest benefits of training different types of FCRs at different stages of treatment and provide a preliminary set of procedures for transitioning between FCR topographies while occasioning minimal target responding.

Relapse and its mitigation: Toward behavioral inoculation

“…Manipulating response effort may also help mitigate relapse. Clinicians should consider selecting relatively low‐effort communicative responses, such as a card touch or card exchange during FCT to increase the likelihood that the client will allocate responding toward low‐effort communication and away from relatively high‐effort problem behavior (DeRosa et al, 2015; Horner & Day, 1991; Tiger et al, 2008; see also Randall et al, 2021). If clinicians wish to instead teach a vocal communication response, the response should be initially simple (e.g., one‐ or two‐word request) and likely to occur reliably with minimal prompting.…”

Reinforcement‐schedule thinning practices during functional communication training: A survey of behavior analysts

“…However, implementers may find it cumbersome to manage treatment materials or to signal the availability of multiple reinforcers simultaneously (e.g., creating unique stimuli for different combinations of available reinforcers; Akers et al., 2018). Additionally, some of the positive treatment effects may degrade when treatment materials go missing or are obscured (e.g., Randall et al., 2021). Finally, although Signaled FCT's durability during tests for treatment relapse is the most investigated of any approach and has shown the largest reductions in problem‐behavior recurrence of any single mitigation procedure (Fisher et al., 2020), it is not immune to relapse during routine thinning.…”