Two principal goals of functional communication training (FCT) are to (a) eliminate destructive behavior and (b) establish a more acceptable, yet functionally equivalent, communication response (FCR). A related and critically important goal is to thin the schedule of reinforcement for the FCR to levels that are reasonably managed by caregivers. Researchers have described several approaches to thinning FCT reinforcement schedules. We summarized the results of 25 consecutive applications (amongst 20 cases) in which schedule-thinning procedures employed discriminative stimuli to signal when the FCR would and would not produce reinforcement (i.e., using multiple schedules, response restriction, or chained schedules). Results suggest schedule-thinning procedures that use discriminative stimuli can maintain the effectiveness of FCT while minimizing the need for punishment or other supplemental procedures.

One limitation of functional communication training (FCT) is that individuals may request reinforcement via the functional communication response (FCR) at exceedingly high rates. Multiple schedules with alternating periods of reinforcement and extinction of the FCR combined with gradually lengthening the extinction-component interval can effectively address this limitation. However, the extent to which each of these components contributes to the effectiveness of the overall approach remains uncertain. In the current investigation, we evaluated the first component by comparing rates of the FCR and problem behavior under mixed and multiple schedules and evaluated the second component by rapidly switching from dense mixed and multiple schedules to lean multiple schedules without gradually thinning the density of reinforcement. Results indicated that multiple schedules decreased the overall rate of reinforcement for the FCR and maintained the strength of the FCR and low rates of problem behavior without gradually thinning the reinforcement schedule.

Researchers typically modify individual functional analysis (FA) conditions after results are inconclusive (Hanley, Iwata, & McCord, 2003). Hanley, Jin, Vanselow, and Hanratty (2014) introduced a marked departure from this practice, using an interview-informed synthesized contingency analysis (IISCA). In the test condition, they delivered multiple contingencies simultaneously (e.g., attention and escape) after each occurrence of problem behavior; in the control condition, they delivered those same reinforcers noncontingently and continuously. In the current investigation, we compared the results of IISCA with a more traditional FA in which we evaluated each putative reinforcer individually. Four of 5 participants displayed destructive behavior that was sensitive to the individual contingencies evaluated in the traditional FA. By contrast, none of the participants showed a response pattern consistent with the assumption of the IISCA. We discuss the implications of these findings on the development of accurate and efficient functional analyses.

A functional analysis showed that a 14-year-old boy with Asperger syndrome displayed perseverative speech (or "restricted interests") reinforced by attention. To promote appropriate speech in a turn-taking format, we implemented differential reinforcement (DR) of nonperseverative speech and DR of on-topic speech within a multiple schedule with stimuli that signaled the contingencies in effect and who was to select the topic. Both treatments reduced perseverative speech, but only DR of on-topic speech increased appropriate turn taking during conversation. Treatment effects were maintained when implemented by family members and novel therapists.