Decreasing excessive functional communication responses while treating destructive behavior using response restriction.

The team worked with kids whose problem behavior kept returning during FCT schedule thinning.

Standard FCT had failed for these children.

They tested response restriction FCT: the child only gets the reinforcer when the correct card is presented.

Wrong cards were blocked and ignored.

Destructive behavior stayed near zero for all kids.

Correct communication responses stayed high.

The procedure worked even when reinforcement became very thin.

Diaz‐Salvat et al. (2020) extends this idea.

They showed that giving kids three or more ways to ask prevents resurgence.

Together the papers show: first tighten stimulus control with RR FCT, then keep multiple responses to stop relapse.

Ghaemmaghami et al. (2018) used shaping instead of restriction.

Both studies reached the same goal: clearer, stronger FCRs without resurgence.

Weyman et al. (2022) also paired FCT with a schedule tweak.

Their multiple schedule worked like RR FCT: problem behavior dropped to zero once the contingency was clear.

If a child’s FCR stays muddy during thinning, you now have two levers: restrict access to the correct card only, or add more response options.

Both moves take five minutes to set up and can save weeks of relapse.

Try RR FCT first when differentiation fails; add response variety later to guard against resurgence.