Association for Behavior Analysis International

In this symposium we provide a discussion of unique presenting concerns and clinical evaluations in clinic settings. The first two papers address schedule thinning considerations functional communication training (FCT). The study by Smith and colleagues evaluates a comparison of a compound schedules of reinforcement involving discriminative stimuli (e.g., multiple or chained schedules, Greer et al., 2016) or within the context of probabilistic, progressive-delay schedules (e.g., contingency-based progressive-delay schedule, Ghaemmaghami et al., 2016) and the relative efficacy of these two methods during schedule thinning for individuals with severe challenging behavior. Similarly, the study by Salvatore and colleagues investigates the efficiency and preference for alternative activities during schedule thinning within FCT. Garcia and Wunderlich extend the work of Edgerton and Wine (2017) by using a function-based treatment to increase appropriate voice volume responses. Last, another unique study by Weber and colleagues implemented an adaptation of the Good Behavior Game with a sibling dyad to decrease destructive behavior. Dr. Tracy Kettering will provide comments on navigating challenges presented by adaptations of assessment and treatment to address unique cases in a clinical setting.

Behavioral specialists Graduate Students Practitioners

Functional communication training (FCT) is an effective treatment for decreasing socially-reinforced destructive behavior (Carr & Durand, 1985). Multiple schedules are frequently used to thin the reinforcement schedule during FCT (Hanley et al., 2001). An extinction burst is possible with each schedule thinning step, contributing to slow treatment progress. In clinical practice, individuals are often expected to sit and wait during periods of restricted access to functional reinforcers; however, in the natural environment, they generally do not wait without alternative items/activities available. Ten children referred for treatment of destructive behavior participated in this study. Therapists conducted functional analyses and taught participants a functional communication response to access functional reinforcers. Therapists implemented a multiple schedule during schedule thinning, comparing a control condition (nothing available during S-delta intervals) to separate conditions with embedded items/activities during S-delta intervals (moderately preferred tangible items, attention, demands). After reaching the terminal schedule in at least one condition, therapists assessed participant preference across S-delta conditions. For 80% of participants, the terminal schedule was only reached with alternative items/activities. All participants demonstrated preference for alternative items/activities and therapists indicated preference for conducting these sessions. For 6 participants, we simultaneously targeted an escape function during the S-delta condition including demands.

Inappropriate prosodic production is often observed, but rarely treated, communication skill deficit for individuals with autism. Few studies have evaluated the acoustic characteristics of prosody in children with ASD, and obtaining a pragmatic measurement of their conversational skills is typically limited to parent and teacher report measures. In one exception in the research, a previous study by Edgerton and Wine (2017) implemented an intervention for shaping the conversational speech volume of an intellectually disabled participant. Expanding on the previous literature, we conducted a functional analysis of the voice volume responses (VVR) of two children with ASD utilizing similar procedures to those from Edgerton and Wine. Further, we evaluated the efficacy of using a function-based treatment, in conjunction with the visual feedback from the app, to increase appropriate VVR. Results of the evaluation, as well as implications for the treatment of inappropriate voice volume and other prosodic behaviors, will be discussed.