Comparison of single and multiple functional communication training responses for the treatment of problem behavior.

The team compared two ways to run FCT without extinction. One group learned six specific mands. Each mand matched one reinforcer. The other group learned one general mand that asked for everything.

They used an alternating-treatments design. Kids with developmental delay joined the study. Sessions switched back and forth so each child tried both styles.

Multiple specific mands wiped out problem behavior. The kids kept asking for what they wanted. One general mand did not work. Problem behavior stayed high and requests stayed low.

Dougherty et al. (1994) showed the same thing earlier. When one behavior has two functions, you need two different communication responses. Donahoe et al. (2000) now proves the rule with a direct test.

Weber et al. (2024) looked at clinic charts years later. They found FCT fails more often when escape is one of several functions. That backs the idea that one generic request is too weak.

Gerber et al. (2011) and Corr et al. (2025) both count this 2000 study as part of the evidence that makes FCT a well-established treatment for kids with ID or autism.

If you skip extinction, give the learner a separate way to ask for each reinforcer. One all-purpose request is not enough. Map each function to its own mand and you will see faster, cleaner behavior drops. Try it next time you run FCT in the classroom or clinic.