Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis logoLink to Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
. 1997 Fall;30(3):459–473. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-459

Evaluation of client preference for function-based treatment packages.

G P Hanley 1, C C Piazza 1, W W Fisher 1, S A Contrucci 1, K A Maglieri 1
PMCID: PMC1284062  PMID: 9316259

Abstract

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.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (207.1 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bannerman D. J., Sheldon J. B., Sherman J. A., Harchik A. E. Balancing the right to habilitation with the right to personal liberties: the rights of people with developmental disabilities to eat too many doughnuts and take a nap. J Appl Behav Anal. 1990 Spring;23(1):79–89. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1990.23-79. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. CATANIA A. C. Concurrent performances: a baseline for the study of reinforcement magnitude. J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Apr;6:299–300. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1963.6-299. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Carr E. G., Durand V. M. Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. J Appl Behav Anal. 1985 Summer;18(2):111–126. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1985.18-111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Catania A. C., Sagvolden T. Preference for free choice over forced choice in pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 Jul;34(1):77–86. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.34-77. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Chung S. H., Herrnstein R. J. Choice and delay of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1967 Jan;10(1):67–74. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1967.10-67. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Durand V. M., Carr E. G. Functional communication training to reduce challenging behavior: maintenance and application in new settings. J Appl Behav Anal. 1991 Summer;24(2):251–264. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1991.24-251. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Faw G. D., Davis P. K., Peck C. Increasing self-determination: teaching people with mental retardation to evaluate residential options. J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Summer;29(2):173–188. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1996.29-173. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Fisher W., Piazza C., Cataldo M., Harrell R., Jefferson G., Conner R. Functional communication training with and without extinction and punishment. J Appl Behav Anal. 1993 Spring;26(1):23–36. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1993.26-23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. HERRNSTEIN R. J. SECONDARY REINFORCEMENT AND RATE OF PRIMARY REINFORCEMENT. J Exp Anal Behav. 1964 Jan;7:27–36. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1964.7-27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Hagopian L. P., Fisher W. W., Legacy S. M. Schedule effects of noncontingent reinforcement on attention-maintained destructive behavior in identical quadruplets. J Appl Behav Anal. 1994 Summer;27(2):317–325. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-317. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Horner R. H., Day H. M. The effects of response efficiency on functionally equivalent competing behaviors. J Appl Behav Anal. 1991 Winter;24(4):719–732. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1991.24-719. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Iwata B. A., Dorsey M. F., Slifer K. J., Bauman K. E., Richman G. S. Toward a functional analysis of self-injury. J Appl Behav Anal. 1994 Summer;27(2):197–209. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-197. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Iwata B. A., Duncan B. A., Zarcone J. R., Lerman D. C., Shore B. A. A sequential, test-control methodology for conducting functional analyses of self-injurious behavior. Behav Modif. 1994 Jul;18(3):289–306. doi: 10.1177/01454455940183003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Kahng S., Iwata B. A., DeLeon I. G., Worsdell A. S. Evaluation of the "control over reinforcement" component in functional communication training. J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Summer;30(2):267–277. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Miller H. L. Matching-based hedonic scaling in the pigeon. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 Nov;26(3):335–347. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.26-335. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Miltenberger R. G., Suda K. T., Lennox D. B., Lindeman D. P. Assessing the acceptability of behavioral treatments to persons with mental retardation. Am J Ment Retard. 1991 Nov;96(3):291–298. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Parsons M. B., Reid D. H. Assessing food preferences among persons with profound mental retardation: providing opportunities to make choices. J Appl Behav Anal. 1990 Summer;23(2):183–195. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1990.23-183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Piazza C. C., Fisher W. W., Hagopian L. P., Bowman L. G., Toole L. Using a choice assessment to predict reinforcer effectiveness. J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Spring;29(1):1–9. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1996.29-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Schwartz I. S., Baer D. M. Social validity assessments: is current practice state of the art? J Appl Behav Anal. 1991 Summer;24(2):189–204. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1991.24-189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Vollmer T. R., Iwata B. A. Establishing operations and reinforcement effects. J Appl Behav Anal. 1991 Summer;24(2):279–291. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1991.24-279. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Vollmer T. R., Iwata B. A., Zarcone J. R., Smith R. G., Mazaleski J. L. The role of attention in the treatment of attention-maintained self-injurious behavior: noncontingent reinforcement and differential reinforcement of other behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1993 Spring;26(1):9–21. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1993.26-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Vollmer T. R., Ringdahl J. E., Roane H. S., Marcus B. A. Negative side effects of noncontingent reinforcement. J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Spring;30(1):161–164. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-161. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Wacker D. P., Steege M. W., Northup J., Sasso G., Berg W., Reimers T., Cooper L., Cigrand K., Donn L. A component analysis of functional communication training across three topographies of severe behavior problems. J Appl Behav Anal. 1990 Winter;23(4):417–429. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1990.23-417. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis are provided here courtesy of Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

RESOURCES