Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2012-9
Functional Communication Training and Chained Schedules of Reinforcement to Treat Challenging Behavior Maintained by Terminations of Activity Interruptions
In this article, the authors evaluated functional communication training (FCT) and a chained schedule of reinforcement for the treatment of challenging behavior exhibited by two individuals diagnosed with Asperger syndrome and autism, respectively. Following a functional analysis with undifferentiated results, the authors demonstrated that challenging behavior was occasioned by interruptions of ongoing activities and maintained by terminations of interruptions. Next, they demonstrated the effectiveness of a treatment consisting of FCT with a chained schedule of reinforcement. Last, they modified the chained schedule procedure to increase ease of implementation and promote toleration of activity interruptions, and academic tasks were incorporated into the treatment.
AdelinisJ. D.HagopianL. P. (1999). The use of symmetrical “do” and “don’t” requests to interrupt ongoing activities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 519-523.
2.
BowmanL. G.FisherW. W.ThompsonR. H.PiazzaC. C. (1997). On the relation of mands and the function of destructive behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 251-265.
3.
CallN. A.WackerD. P.RingdahlJ. E.BoelterE. W. (2005). Combined antecedent variables as motivating operations within functional analyses. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38, 385-389.
4.
CarrE. G.DurandV. M. (1985). Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 111-126.
5.
DolezalD. N.KurtzP. F. (2010). Evaluation of combined-antecedent variables on functional analysis results and treatment of problem behavior in a school setting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 309-314.
6.
FersterC. B.SkinnerB. F. (1957). Schedules of reinforcement. New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
7.
FisherW. W.AdelinisJ. D.ThompsonR. H.WorsdellA. S.ZarconeJ. R. (1998). Functional analysis and treatment of destructive behavior maintained by termination of “don’t” (and symmetrical “do”) requests. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 339-356.
8.
FisherW. W.PiazzaC. C.CataldoM.HarrellR.JeffersonG.ConnerR. (1993). Functional communication training with and without extinction and punishment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 23-36.
9.
FisherW. W.PiazzaC. C.ChiangC. L. (1996). Effects of equal and unequal reinforcer duration during functional analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 117-120.
10.
FisherW. W.ThompsonR. H.HagopianL. G.BowmanL. G.KrugA. (2000). Facilitating tolerance of delayed reinforcement during functional communication training. Behavior Modification, 24, 3-29.
11.
GollubL. (1977). Conditioned reinforcement: Schedule effects. In HonigW. K.StaddonJ. E. R. (Eds.), Handbook of operant behavior (pp. 288-312). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
12.
HagopianL. P.BruzekJ. L.BowmanL. G.JennettH. K. (2007). Assessment and treatment of problem behavior occasioned by interruption of free-operant behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 89-103.
13.
HanleyG. P.HealN. A.TigerJ. H.IngvarssonE. T. (2007). Evaluation of a classwide teaching program for developing preschool life skills. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 277-300.
14.
HanleyG. P.IwataB. A.ThompsonR. H. (2001). Reinforcement schedule thinning following treatment with functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34, 17-38.
15.
HanleyG. P.PiazzaC. C.FisherW. W.ContrucciS. A.MaglieriK. A. (1997). Evaluation of client preference for function-based treatment packages. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 459-473.
16.
IwataB. A.DorseyM. F.SliferK. J.BaumanK. E.RichmanG. S. (1994). Toward a functional analysis of self-injury. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 197-209.
17.
KuhnD. E.ChirighinA. E.ZelenkaK. (2010). Discriminated communication: A procedural extension of functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 249-264.
18.
LuczynskiK. C.HanleyG. P. (2009). Do children prefer contingencies? An evaluation of the efficacy of and preference for contingent versus noncontingent social reinforcement during play. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 511-525.
19.
LuczynskiK. C.HanleyG. P. (2010). Examining the generality of children’s preference for contingent reinforcement via extension to different responses, reinforcers, and schedules. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 397-409.
20.
MaceF. C. (1994). The significance and future of functional analysis methodologies. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 385-392.
21.
MyersS. M.Plauché JohnsonC. (2007). Management of children with autism spectrum disorders. Pediatrics, 120, 1162-1182.
22.
O’ReillyM. F.LaceyC.LancioniG. E. (2000). Assessment of the influence of background noise on escape-maintained problem behavior and pain behavior in a child with Williams syndrome. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33, 511-514.
23.
RoaneH. S.VollmerT. R.RingdahlJ. E.MarcusB. A. (1998). Evaluation of a brief stimulus preference assessment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 605-620.
24.
SigafoosJ.MeikleB. (1996). Functional communication training for the treatment of multiply determined challenging behavior in two boys with autism. Behavior Modification, 20, 60-84.
25.
TigerJ. H.HanleyG. P.BruzekJ. (2008). Functional communication training: A review and practical guide. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1, 16-23.
26.
TigerJ. H.HanleyG. P.HealN. A. (2006). The effectiveness of and preschoolers’ preferences for variations of multiple-schedule arrangements. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39, 475-488.
27.
Van CampC. M.LermanD. C.KelleyM. E.RoaneH. S.ContrucciS. A.VorndranC. M. (2000). Further analysis of idiosyncratic antecedent influences during the assessment and treatment of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33, 207-221.
28.
WackerD. P.BergW. K.HardingJ. W.BarrettoA.RankinB.GanzerJ. (2005). Treatment effectiveness, stimulus generalization, and acceptability to parents of functional communication training. Educational Psychology, 25, 233-256.
29.
WackerD. P.HardingJ.CooperL. J.DerbyK. M.PeckS.AsmusJ. . . . BrownK. A. (1996). The effects of meal schedule and quantity on problematic behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 79-87.
30.
WackerD. P.McMahonC.SteegeM.BergW.SassoG.MelloyK. (1990). Applications of a sequential alternating treatments design. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 333-339.
