Approaches for Treating Multiply Controlled Problem Behavior

Boyle et al. (2024) wrote a narrative review. They pulled together ways to assess and treat problem behavior that is driven by more than one reinforcer.

The paper is not a new experiment. It is a map of what to do when one behavior gets payoff in several ways—say, escape and attention.

The big idea: test each payoff one at a time. Run your functional analyses in a clear order. Only mix treatments after you know each function.

This keeps the treatment package tight and avoids tossing in parts you do not need.

Staats et al. (2000) showed the same rule early. They taught kids with autism a new communicative response for each function of stereotypy. When the response matched the reinforcer, stereotypy dropped. When it did not, nothing changed. Boyle’s review echoes that match-to-function rule.

Zabala et al. (2022) took the idea further. They thinned reinforcement for kids whose problem behavior served two functions. They used an easy-task switch to make delays tolerable. Their data show you can stretch reinforcement after the functions are known, giving a practical next step after Boyle’s sequential testing.

Khokhar et al. (2025) looked at adults, not kids. They found that packages with several ABA parts beat single-procedure plans. Boyle’s review and Khokhar’s numbers line up: multi-function behavior needs multi-part treatment. The difference is Khokhar counted effect sizes; Boyle tells you how to build the package step-by-step.

On Monday, list every reinforcer you suspect. Run a mini FA for each one before you blend treatments. This cuts wasted parts and keeps your intervention lean. Your client gets a clear plan, and you get cleaner data to show the team.