Assessment and treatment of problem behavior maintained by mand compliance

Eluri et al. (2016) worked with a child whose problem behavior paid off every time adults gave in to the child’s demands. They set up a token board. The child earned tokens for polite requests and lost tokens for problem behavior. Green and red cards told the child when adults would or would not comply with demands.

The team ran an A-B-A-B design. They measured how often problem behavior happened across conditions.

Problem behavior dropped sharply when the token-plus-response-cost system was in place. The red and green cards alone cut behavior even before tokens were given or taken away.

When the system was removed, problem behavior returned. When it came back, behavior improved again.

Andzik et al. (2022) also used tokens to reduce problem behavior, but they removed extinction entirely. Their students got a quick 30-second break for problem behavior and a token for compliance. Both studies show tokens work, yet Natalie proves you can succeed without withholding reinforcement.

Jowett Hirst et al. (2016) asked whether adding or removing tokens matters more. They found both reinforcement and response cost work equally well for on-task behavior. Eluri extends that idea to behavior maintained by adult compliance.

Regnier et al. (2022) remind us to plan for the day tokens stop. They found thinning token schedules while adding praise or self-monitoring keeps gains after the board is put away. Eluri did not test maintenance, so follow their advice once behavior is low.

If a client hits or screams until you give the item, you now have a ready script. Set clear rules about when you will or will not comply. Use a token board with response cost. Post a green card when compliance is possible and a red card when it is not. Start with dense reinforcement, then follow Regnier’s tips to thin and maintain. You can cut problem behavior without endless extinction battles.