A preliminary investigation on improving functional communication training by mitigating resurgence of destructive behavior

Two children got FCT for destructive behavior. First the team taught each child one simple request.

Next they used a multiple schedule. The green card meant “ask now and get it.” The red card meant “ask but wait.” They slowly made the red periods longer.

Last they ran an extinction probe. No requests worked. They watched to see if problem behavior popped back up.

Both kids kept low problem behavior during the red periods. When extinction came, almost no behavior returned.

The multiple-schedule thinning acted like a vaccine. It buffered the kids against resurgence later.

Weyman et al. (2022) later copied the same multiple-schedule trick. They paired it with a quick trial-based FA for ritual interruption and still blocked resurgence.

Ghaemmaghami et al. (2018) used shaping instead of schedule thinning. They moved kids from simple to complex requests and also saw no return of problem behavior.

Ghaemmaghami et al. (2016) ran a cousin study the same year. They compared two ways to thin delays after FCT: time-based versus contingency-based. Both teams wanted the same goal—keep behavior low while stretching reinforcement—but used different road maps.

If you plan to thin or pause reinforcement later, weave a multiple schedule into FCT early. Start with short “wait” periods. Grow them slowly. The child learns “sometimes I wait, and that’s okay.” When life hands you an extinction burst—staff shortage, broken vending machine, new teacher—the behavior stays quiet. One practical move: add red-card trials for five minutes today, ten tomorrow, then mix in surprise probes. Your future self will thank you when the client keeps talking instead of hitting.