Minimizing resurgence of destructive behavior using behavioral momentum theory

WFrazier et al. (2018) tested a leaner way to run Functional Communication Training. They kept the starting reinforcement rate low and stretched treatment longer before thinning.

Kids who hurt themselves or others got FCT plus these momentum-style tweaks. Later the team briefly cut reinforcement to see if problem behavior bounced back.

Problem behavior returned less when FCT began lean and stayed lean. The longer runway before thinning helped the new communication stick.

Standard dense FCT produced more resurgence. Lean-plus-long beat it head-to-head.

Fisher et al. (2019) showed dense baseline reinforcement fuels later resurgence. WW adds two more brakes: keep FCT lean and wait longer before thinning.

Irwin Helvey et al. (2023) looked lean versus dense FCT schedules and saw no difference. Their test thinned right away; WW kept the lean schedule stable longer, which may explain the mismatch.

Suess et al. (2020) cut resurgence in half by starting FCT in a 'clean' telehealth room. WW shows you can get a similar shield without changing rooms—just run lean and long.

Greer et al. (2024) confirm big early drops in reinforcement spark the biggest relapse. WW’s gradual, extended approach sidesteps that trap.

Start FCT on a lean VR schedule and stay there for more sessions before you thin. You will likely see less resurgence when caregivers accidentally reinforce the old problem behavior. One practical shift: deliver the functional reinforcer every 4-6 responses at first, not every response, and keep that ratio until the communicative response is rock-solid.