Exchange‐based communication training may not consistently facilitate communication in the absence of the requested item

Three children with developmental delay learned to hand over a picture card to ask for toys.

The team used a multiple-baseline design. They first taught the exchange, then tested if the kids still asked when the toy was hidden.

Each child got 12 trials: six with the toy in sight, six with the toy absent.

Two kids kept handing over the card even when the box was empty.

One child stopped asking as soon as the toy disappeared.

In other words, one-third of learners only request when they can see the item.

Wilson et al. (2016) showed that harder responses fade away faster. Pizarro’s result feels similar: the hidden-toy condition raises the response cost, so one child simply quit.

Macadangdang et al. (2022) used BST to teach motor skills and saw the gains spread to new games. Pizarro did not test generalization, but the two kids who asked for absent toys hint that exchange training can transfer without extra steps.

Jimenez-Gomez et al. (2019) taught staff to use naturalistic cues. Their clients learned to comment during play, even when items were out of reach. Pizarro’s child who failed the absent-toy trial shows that picture exchange alone may not reach that same flexibility; adding naturalistic prompts could bridge the gap.

Before you call a request skill “mastered,” run probe trials when the item is missing. If the child stops asking, add a brief prompt or teach an “I don’t see it” response. This quick check saves you from surprise silence later.