Functional communication training (FCT) is an evidence-based intervention that while often effective, can result in rote responding, reduced generalizability of target behavior, and resurgence of challenging behavior (CB) during treatment lapses. Lag schedules of reinforcement have been successfully used to address these concerns. We applied an increasing lag schedule within FCT to increase the variability and persistence of appropriate responding of four young children with disabilities while maintaining low levels of CB during treatment. Our results provide evidence regarding the effects of lag reinforcement on appropriate communication and CB during treatment and lapses in treatment with children with autism and Down syndrome. This research provides a new perspective to the field given, we assessed functional communication during baseline, assessed generalization to new contexts, and assessed social validity via both masked raters and participants’ mothers. We discuss the implications of this work and provide future directions for researcher and practice.
AdamiS.FalcomataT. S.MuethingC. S.HoffmanK. (2017). An evaluation of lag schedules of reinforcement during functional communication training: Effects on varied mand responding and challenging behavior. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10, 209–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-017-0179-7
2.
ArgottP. (2010). Increasing the variability of verbal responding in children and adolescents with autism using a conjunctive differential reinforcement schedule [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. City University of New York.
3.
BaerD. M.WolfM. M.RisleyT. R. (1987). Some still-current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 20(4), 313–327. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1987.20-313
4.
BartonE. E.LloydB. P.SpriggsA. D.GastD. L. (2018). Visual analysis of graphic data. In LedfordJ. R.GastD. L. (Eds.), Single case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences (3rd ed., pp. 179–214). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315150666-8
5.
CarrE. G.DurandV. M. (1985). Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18(2), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1985.18-111
6.
ChezanL. C.WolfeK.DrasgowE. (2017). A meta-analysis of functional communication training effects on problem behavior and alternative communicative responses. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 33(4), 195–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357617741294
7.
CooperV.EmersonE.GloverG.GoreN. J.HassiotisA.HastingsR.KnappM. R. J.McGillP.OliverC.PinneyA.RichardsC.IemmiV.ShurlockJ. (2014) Early intervention for children with learning disabilities whose behaviour challenges. (Working paper No. 49229). Challenging Behaviour Foundation.
8.
DunlapG.StrainP. S.FoxL.CartaJ. J.ConroyM.SmithB. J.KernL.HemmeterM. L.TimmM. A.MccartA.SailorW.MarkeyU.MarkeyD. J.LardieriS.SowellC. (2006). Prevention and intervention with young children’s challenging behavior: Perspectives regarding current knowledge. Behavioral Disorders, 32(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874290603200103
9.
DurandV. M.MoskowitzL. (2015). Functional communication training: Thirty years of treating challenging behavior. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 35(2), 116–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121415569509
10.
FalcomataT. S.MuethingC. S.SilbaughB. C.AdamiS.HoffmanK.ShpallC.RingdahlJ. E. (2018). Lag schedules and functional communication training: Persistence of mands and relapse of problem behavior. Behavior Modification, 42(3), 314–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445517741475
11.
GilliamW. S. (2005). Prekindergarteners left behind: Expulsion rates in state prekindergarten systems. Yale Child Study Center, Yale University.
12.
HeldtJ.SchlingerH. D. (2012). Increased variability in tacting under a lag 3 schedule of reinforcement. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 28(1), 131–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03393114
13.
IwataB. A.DozierC. L. (2008). Clinical application of functional analysis methodology. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(1), 3–9.
14.
JonesD. E.GreenbergM.CrowleyM. (2015). Early social-emotional functioning and public health: The relationship between kindergarten social competence and future wellness. American Journal of Public Health, 105(11), 2283–2290. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2015.302630
15.
KeenD. (2003). Communicative repair strategies and problem behaviours of children with autism. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 50(1), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912032000053331
16.
Koehler-PlattenK.GrowL. L.SchulzeK. A.BertoneT. (2013). Using a lag reinforcement schedule to increase phonemic variability in children with autism spectrum disorders. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 29(1), 71–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03393125
17.
LedfordJ. R.LaneJ. D.GastD. L. (2018). Dependent measures and measurement systems. In LedfordJ. R.GastD. L. (Eds.), Single case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences (3rd ed., pp. 97–132). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315150666
18.
LeeR.SturmeyP. (2014). The effects of script-fading and a Lag-1 schedule on varied social responding in children with autism. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 8(4), 440–448.
19.
LeeR.McComasJ. J.JaworJ. (2002). The effects of differential and lag reinforcement schedules on varied verbal responding by individuals with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35(4), 391–402. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2002.35-391
20.
LightJ.DragerK. (2007). AAC technologies for young children with complex communication needs: State of the science and future research directions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23(3), 204–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610701553635
21.
LloydB. P.YoderP. J.TappJ.StaubitzJ. L. (2016). The relative accuracy and interpretability of five sequential analysis methods: A simulation study. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 1482–1491. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0661-5
22.
O’NeillJ.RehfeldtR. A. (2014). Selection-based instruction and the emergence of topography-based responses to interview questions. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 30(2), 178–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40616-014-0013-z
23.
PageS.NeuringerA. (1985). Variability is an operant.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 11(3), 429–452. https://doi.org/10.1037/0097-7403.11.3.429
24.
PowellD.DunlapG.FoxL. (2006). Prevention and intervention for the challenging behaviors of toddlers and preschoolers. Infants & Young Children, 19(1), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001163-200601000-00004
25.
ReimersT. M.WackerD. P. (1988). Parents’ ratings of the acceptability of behavioral treatment recommendations made in an outpatient clinic: A preliminary analysis of the influence of treatment effectiveness. Behavioral Disorders, 14(1), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874298801400104
26.
ReinkeW. M.StormontM.HermanK. C.PuriR.GoelN. (2011). Supporting children’s mental health in schools: Teacher perceptions of needs, roles, and barriers. School Psychology Quarterly, 26(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022714
27.
RingdahlJ. E.FalcomataT. S.ChristensenT. J.Bass-RingdahlS. M.LentzA.DuttA.Schuh-ClausJ. (2009). Evaluation of a pre-treatment assessment to select mand topographies for functional communication training. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30(2), 330–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2008.06.002
28.
RingdahlJ. E.St. PeterC. (2017). Resurgence: The unintended maintenance of problem behavior. Education and Treatment of Children, 40(1), 7–26. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2017.0002
29.
RodriguezN. M.ThompsonR. H. (2015). Behavioral variability and autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48(1), 167–187. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.164
30.
SchieltzK. M.WackerD. P.RingdahlJ. E.BergW. K. (2017). Basing assessment and treatment of problem behavior on behavioral momentum theory: Analyses of behavioral persistence. Behavioural Processes, 141(1), 75–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2017.02.013
31.
SilbaughB. C.FalcomataT. S. (2016). Translational evaluation of a lag schedule and variability in food consumed by a boy with autism and food selectivity. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 20(5), 309–312. https://doi.org/10.3109/17518423.2016.1146364
32.
SilbaughB. C.FalcomataT. S. (2019). Effects of a lag schedule with progressive time delay on sign mand variability in a boy with autism. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 12(1), 124–132.
33.
SilbaughB. C.MurrayC.KellyM. P.HealyO. (2021). A systematic synthesis of lag schedule research in individuals with autism and other populations. Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 8(1), 92–107.
34.
SilbaughB. C.SwinneaS.FalcomataT. S. (2020). Replication and extension of the effects of lag schedules on mand variability and challenging behavior during functional communication training. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 36(1), 49–73.
35.
SilbaughB. C.WingateH. V.FalcomataT. S. (2017). Effects of lag schedules and response blocking on variant food consumption by a girl with autism. Behavioral Interventions, 32(1), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.1453
36.
Simó-PinatellaD.Mumbardó-AdamC.Alomar-KurzE.SugaiG.SimonsenB. (2019). Prevalence of challenging behaviors exhibited by children with disabilities: Mapping the literature. Journal of Behavioral Education, 28(3), 323–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-019-09326-9
37.
SnellM. E.VoorheesM. D.BerlinR. A.Stanton-ChapmanT. L.HaddenS.McCartyJ. (2012). Use of interview and observation to clarify reported practices of Head Start Staff Concerning Problem Behavior. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14(2), 108–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300711416819
38.
SteinbrennerJ. R.HumeK.OdomS. L.MorinK. L.NowellS. W.TomaszewskiB.SzendryS.McIntyreN. S.Yücesoy-ÖzkanS.SavageM. N. (2020). Evidence-based practices for children, youth, and young adults with autism. National Clearinghouse on Autism Evidence and Practice Review Team, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. https://ncaep.fpg.unc.edu/sites/ncaep.fpg.unc.edu/files/imce/documents/EBP%20Report%202020.pdf
TurnerM. (1999). Annotation: Repetitive behavior in autism: A review of psychological research. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40(6), 839–849. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.00502
41.
VinhM.StrainP.DavidonS.SmithB. J. (2016). One state’s systems change efforts to reduce child care expulsion: Taking the Pyramid Model to scale. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 36(3), 159–164.
42.
WackerD. P.HardingJ. W.BergW. K.LeeJ. F.SchieltzK. M.PadillaY. C.NevinJ. A.ShahanT. A. (2011). An evaluation of persistence of treatment effects during long-term treatment of destructive behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 96(2), 261–282. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2011.96-261
43.
WolfeK.SlocumT. A.KunnavatanaS. S. (2014). Promoting behavioral variability in individuals with autism spectrum disorders: A literature review. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 29(3), 180–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357614525661
44.
YoderP. J.LedfordJ. R.HarbisonA. L.TappJ. T. (2018). Partial-interval estimation of count: Uncorrected and Poisson-corrected error levels. Journal of Early Intervention, 40(1), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053815117748407
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
