Identification and modification of a response-class hierarchy.

The team watched a boy with autism and ID during hard math tasks. When work showed up, he first tried to break pencils, then hit the table, then screamed.

They let him leave the task only after each response. Later they stopped letting him leave. They timed how fast each move appeared.

The same order showed up every time. Pencil break came fastest, then table hit, then scream. When escape ended, the whole chain slowed down together.

A new vocal request could be slipped into the middle of the chain and it kept the same tidy order.

Lejuez et al. (2001) saw the same ladder pattern with attention-maintained biting and head-banging. The ladder holds even when the payoff is attention, not escape.

Johnson et al. (2009) used the idea in reverse. They timed how fast kids protested against many demands. Tasks that sparked the fastest protest went into the escape condition of the FA. Shorter-latency demands gave clearer FA graphs.

CROSS et al. (1962) first mapped orderly latency jumps in typical adults hearing mixed tones. The 1995 study shows the same rule works for problem behavior in autism.

You can map a client’s own hierarchy in ten minutes. Run a short escape extinction probe, note which topography appears first and how fast. Use that list to decide what to block first, what to replace, and where to insert a mand. The ladder gives you a ready-made intervention sequence instead of guessing.