Comparison of naturalistic and arbitrary discriminative stimuli during schedule thinning following functional communication training

Three boys with autism finished FCT for problem behavior. Then staff compared two ways to thin the schedule.

One way used natural cues like the room layout. The other used arbitrary cues like colored cards.

Staff tracked how fast each boy learned the new rule and if the rule stayed when cues were removed.

Two boys learned the rule faster with the colored cards. They kept the rule when thinning sped up.

The third boy never kept the rule, no matter which cue type was used.

So arbitrary cues can speed learning, but they do not promise long-term control.

Miller et al. (2022) reached lean schedules without resurgence by adding a quick extinction test first. Boyle et al. (2021) did not use that test, so one boy’s rule fell apart. The two studies fit like puzzle pieces: use arbitrary cues for speed, then run the extinction test for strength.

Gerow et al. (2018) reviewed 26 parent-run FCT cases. They found big drops in problem behavior, yet few parents kept high fidelity. Boyle’s mixed results hint that weak stimulus control may explain the fade-out Stephanie saw.

CHUNG (1965) showed pigeons can follow a rule even when payoff is delayed. The boys in Boyle’s study did the same, but only when the cue was extra clear. Basic animal work still maps onto kids when schedules get tricky.

If you thin schedules after FCT, pick your cue on purpose. Want fast acquisition? Use an arbitrary cue like a bright card or unique beep. Want durable behavior? Probe without the cue early and often. If responding crashes, pause thinning and rebuild stimulus control before moving on.