ABA Fundamentals

An evaluation of delay to reinforcement and mand variability during functional communication training

Muething et al. (2018) · Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2018
★ The Verdict

A tiny wait for the reinforcer during FCT can unlock new mand forms on the spot.

✓ Read this if BCBAs running FCT with children who repeat the same mand
✗ Skip if Clinicians already using rich lag schedules or multiple exemplar training

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Muething et al. (2018) worked with four children who had autism or developmental delay. Each child was already using one mand during FCT. The team added a short wait between the mand and the reinforcer to see if the kids would try new ways to ask.

Sessions moved from no delay to a 3-second or 5-second delay. No extra teaching steps were added. The researchers counted how many different mand forms each child used and tracked any problem behavior.

02

What they found

Every child started using new mand topographies once the delay began. One quiet child began whispering, then spoke aloud. Another child added new signs while still using the old one.

Problem behavior results were mixed. Two kids showed no change, one dropped slightly, and one had a small uptick. Overall, the delay grew the mand toolbox without hurting safety for most.

03

How this fits with other research

Silbaugh et al. (2019) ran a direct follow-up. They paired a Lag 1 rule with progressive time delay and got the same boost in varied signing. Their design shows you can stack a lag schedule on top of simple delay for even more variety.

Clarke et al. (2003) set the stage. They taught people with intellectual disability to wait for bigger reinforcers by starting with no delay and stretching it slowly. Muething skips the warm-up and jumps straight to a fixed delay, yet still sees success, suggesting kids with ASD may tolerate waits better than once thought.

Perez et al. (2015) looked at mand familiarity instead of delay. They found kids stick with the old mand even when it sparks more problem behavior. Muething’s delay tactic offers a fix: keep the same reinforcer, just make the child wait a beat, and new mands pop out.

04

Why it matters

You can widen a child’s communication without extra drills or new tokens. Next time a client locks into one rote mand, insert a 3-second pause before delivering the item. Watch for any new vocal, sign, or picture attempt and reinforce it on the spot. One simple schedule tweak can build a flexible speaker.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Add a 3-second delay after the mand before handing over the item; reinforce any novel response

02At a glance

Intervention
functional communication training
Design
single case other
Sample size
4
Population
autism spectrum disorder, developmental delay
Finding
positive

03Original abstract

Children with autism spectrum disorder and other developmental disabilities often exhibit invariant responding (i.e., restricted behavioral repertoires), deficits in communication, and challenging behavior. Approaches demonstrated in the basic and applied literature to increase response variability include extinction, lag schedules of reinforcement, and percentile schedules of reinforcement. Results of basic studies have also indicated that delays to reinforcement often produce increases in response variability. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the effects of a delay to reinforcement on the variability of communication responses during functional communication training with individuals with developmental disabilities and histories of engaging in challenging behavior. Results indicated that delays to reinforcement increased mand variability with all four participants with variable effects on challenging behavior across participants.

Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2018 · doi:10.1002/jaba.441