Prevalence of resurgence of destructive behavior when thinning reinforcement schedules during functional communication training

Treatments based on differential reinforcement may inadvertently increase the recurrence of problem behavior in the face of challenges because reinforcers for appropriate behavior occur in the same context as problem behavior. The current study evaluated one potential approach to mitigating these problems with differential reinforcement treatments based on behavioral momentum theory. Specifically, appropriate behavior was trained in contexts without a history of reinforcement prior to intervening with problem behavior. Participants were 4 children with autism spectrum disorder. Treatment used telehealth to implement functional communication training (FCT) in three alternative contexts with minimal or no history of reinforcement for problem behavior before initiating FCT in the treatment context. Evaluations of the effects of treatment and tests of resurgence were conducted intermittently during treatment to evaluate maintenance. When FCT treatment was initiated in alternative contexts, initial results were comparable to more typical implementations of FCT. Resurgence was reduced to similar levels during tests of resurgence for all participants when compared to more typical previously published implementations of FCT, but clinically significant reductions in resurgence occurred more quickly in the present study. These findings support training appropriate behavior in an alternative context to mitigate the resurgence of problem behavior during differential reinforcement treatments.

mentioning

confidence: 90%

An evaluation of resurgence following functional communication training conducted in alternative antecedent contexts via telehealth

Suess

Schieltz

Wacker

et al. 2019

“…Briggs et al (2018) found that resurgence is common when using FCT-at least one episode of resurgence in over 75% (19/25) of FCT applications during reinforcementschedule thinning. The contingencies in a resurgence progression typically involve delivery of functional reinforcement for destructive behavior in Phase 1, delivery of functional reinforcement for the FCR and extinction of destructive behavior in Phase 2, and extinction for both responses in Phase 3.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…During FCT, a functional communication response (FCR) produces access to the reinforcer for destructive behavior based on the results of a functional analysis (i.e., functional reinforcement), and destructive behavior is placed on extinction. Although FCT typically reduces destructive behavior by more than 95% postreinforcement-schedule thinning (e.g., Greer, Fisher, Saini, Owen, & Jones, 2016), treatment relapse in the form of resurgence often occurs during the thinning process (Briggs, Fisher, Greer, & Kimball, 2018). Although FCT typically reduces destructive behavior by more than 95% postreinforcement-schedule thinning (e.g., Greer, Fisher, Saini, Owen, & Jones, 2016), treatment relapse in the form of resurgence often occurs during the thinning process (Briggs, Fisher, Greer, & Kimball, 2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mitigating resurgence of destructive behavior using the discriminative stimuli of a multiple schedule

Fisher

Fuhrman

Greer

et al. 2019

Self Cite

Results of several recent translational studies have suggested that correlating contextual or discriminative stimuli with the delivery and withholding of reinforcement for the functional communication response (FCR) may mitigate resurgence of destructive behavior, but few, if any, have isolated the effects of those stimuli. In the present study, we first trained the FCR, brought it under stimulus control of a multiple schedule, and thinned its reinforcement schedule in one stimulus context. Next, we conducted resurgence evaluations (i.e., baseline, functional communication training [FCT], extinction challenge) in two novel contexts to test the effects of the discriminative stimuli on resurgence. We programmed one context to include the (a) S D during the FCT phase to signal the availability of reinforcement for the FCR and (b) S Δ during a subsequent extinction challenge to signal the unavailability of reinforcement for the FCR. The other context did not include the S D during the FCT phase, nor the S Δ during the extinction challenge. We expected to see greater persistence of the FCR in the context that included the S D during FCT and less persistence of the FCR and less resurgence of destructive behavior in the context that included the S Δ during the extinction challenge. Obtained results confirmed this latter prediction, but we observed no reliable difference when the S D was present or absent during the FCT phase. Our results have relevance for practitioners in that they provide further empirical support for the use of discriminative stimuli when treating destructive behavior.

“…As such, a better understanding of the phenomenon might also provide important insights into problem solving and creativity (e.g., Epstein, 1985;Shahan & Chase, 2002). Although such treatments are highly effective, elimination or reduction of reinforcement for the alternative behavior can produce increases in the previously suppressed problem behavior (see Briggs, Fisher, Greer, & Kimball, 2018;Volkert, Lerman, Call, & Trosclair-Lasserre, 2009;Wacker et al, 2011). For example, in applications of differential-reinforcement-of-alternativebehavior (i.e., DRA), an undesirable target behavior is typically placed on extinction while an appropriate alternative behavior is reinforced (see Petscher, Rey, & Bailey, 2009;Tiger, Hanley, & Bruzek, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Resurgence as Choice in Context: Treatment duration and on/off alternative reinforcement

Shahan

Browning

Nall

2019

Resurgence as Choice (RaC) is a quantitative theory suggesting that an increase in an extinguished target behavior with subsequent extinction of an alternative behavior (i.e., resurgence) is governed by the same processes as choice more generally. We present data from an experiment with rats examining a range of treatment durations with alternative reinforcement plus extinction and demonstrate that increases in treatment duration produce small but reliable decreases in resurgence. Although RaC predicted the relation between target responding and treatment duration, the model failed in other respects. First, contrary to predictions, the present experiment also replicated previous findings that exposure to cycling on/off alternative reinforcement reduces resurgence. Second, RaC did a poor job simultaneously accounting for target and alternative behaviors across conditions. We present a revised model incorporating a role for more local signaling effects of reinforcer deliveries or their absence on response allocation. Such signaling effects are suggested to impact response allocation above and beyond the values of the target and alternative behaviors as longer-term repositories of experience. The new model provides an excellent account of the data and can be viewed as an integration of RaC and a quantitative approximation of some aspects of Context Theory.