Assessing preferences for positive and negative reinforcement during treatment of destructive behavior with functional communication training.
Let kids choose their reinforcer menu during FCT—some want only praise and toys, others want praise plus escape.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Two kids with autism got FCT for destructive behavior. One kid could pick praise and toys. The other kid could pick praise, toys, OR escape from work. The team watched which reinforcers each child chose during sessions.
They used an alternating-treatments design. Some days only positive reinforcers were on the menu. Other days both positive and negative reinforcers were on the menu. The kids' choices guided the next steps.
What they found
One child wanted only the positive stuff: attention and small toys. The second child wanted the combo platter. He picked both praise AND escape when the menu let him.
Results were mixed because each child had a different favorite recipe. No single reinforcer plan fit both kids.
How this fits with other research
Irwin Helvey et al. (2023) later showed kids often prefer DRC that mixes functional and non-functional items. That study extends the 2005 idea: let the client choose the blend.
Corrigan et al. (1998) had already proven FCT still works when you swap in an alternative positive reinforcer under stimulus control. The 2005 study simply let the learner decide which swap to use.
Gerber et al. (2011) systematic review bundles the 2005 paper inside the evidence that makes FCT a well-established treatment. The review says the method is solid; the 2005 detail shows you can tailor the reinforcers inside that solid method.
Why it matters
You already know FCT cuts problem behavior. This paper reminds you to ask the client which pay-off works. Offer a choice between praise, tangibles, escape, or any mix. Watch what the learner picks, then run FCT with that custom package. One kid may stay engaged with only high-fives and stickers. Another may need the high-five plus a quick break from tasks. Letting the learner vote keeps motivation high and behavior low.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →During the next FCT session, place two or three reinforcer cards in front of the learner and let them point to their preferred combo before each trial.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Results of prior studies (e.g. [J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 32 (1999) 285]) showing that participants chose alternative behavior (compliance) over escape-reinforced destructive behavior when this latter response produced escape and the former response produced positive reinforcement may have been due to (a) the value of the positive reinforcer overriding the value of the negative reinforcer or (b) the presence of the positive reinforcer altering the value of the negative reinforcer (i.e., lessening the aversiveness of the demands). In this investigation we evaluated the relative contributions of these alternative mechanisms with two girls with autism. We compared the relative effects of positive and negative reinforcement using equivalent communication responses under both a restricted-choice condition (in which participants could choose positive or negative reinforcement, but not both) and an unrestricted-choice condition (in which participants could choose one or both reinforcers). Both participants often chose positive over negative reinforcement in the restricted-choice condition. However, in the unrestricted-choice condition (in which participants could choose one or both reinforcers), one participant consistently chose both reinforcers by the end of the analysis whereas the other primarily chose only positive reinforcement. Results suggested that for one participant the value of the positive reinforcer overrode the value of the negative reinforcer, whereas for the other participant, the presence of the positive reinforcer in the demand context lessened the aversiveness of the demands.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2005 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2004.01.007