Treating destructive behavior reinforced by increased caregiver compliance with the participant's mands

The team worked with one child who hit and kicked adults. Caregivers gave the child things right after the outbursts. The researchers wanted to know if the hitting was really a way to make adults obey requests.

They first ran a short mand test. Staff withheld items until the child asked. If the child asked nicely and still got the item, hitting stopped. This proved the behavior was pre-current to mand compliance.

Next they taught the child to ask instead of hit. They then thinned the schedule. Reinforcement started on FR-1 and moved to FR-5, then VR-5, then VR-10.

Destructive behavior dropped a large share from baseline. The child kept asking nicely even when items came only after ten asks on average.

Gains lasted two months with no extra drugs or restraints.

Cengher et al. (2020) also treated hitting kept alive by adult compliance. They used extinction of the hits and one-word mands. The hits first rose, then new long sentences appeared. Owen et al. did the opposite: they kept reinforcing mands but on thinner schedules. Both teams got big drops, showing two roads to the same stop sign.

Matson et al. (2011) showed that withholding signed mands can spark brand-new vocal words. Owen’s study extends this idea: once you see the mand source, you can feed it on a lean diet and still protect the new form.

Harrison et al. (1975) warned that rich schedules before extinction cause more burst aggression. Owen’s team sidestepped this by thinning first, proving a lean history keeps later problem behavior low.

If your FA is muddy, run a five-minute mand probe. Ask, withhold, then give after the request. If problem behavior tanks, you have a mand-compliance case. Start FR-1 for the mand, then thin quickly. You can cut destruction by a large share without extinction or punishment.