Clarifying an ambiguous functional analysis with matched and mismatched extinction procedures.

One child hit himself during a functional analysis. The test results were unclear.

The team ran three short probes. One probe removed sensory payoff. One removed escape. One removed both. They watched which probe stopped the hitting.

Only the sensory extinction probe worked. The child stopped hitting when the sound of his hand on the table was muffled.

Escape extinction did nothing. The team learned the behavior was automatic, not escape.

Taylor et al. (1993) showed that you need an experiment to tell attention from escape. This study adds: when the experiment is still fuzzy, run matched extinction probes.

Dowdy et al. (2018) got nail-cutting compliance without any extinction. That looks opposite, but the kids had ASD and the behavior was escape, not sensory. Different kids, different payoff.

Gossou et al. (2022) found caregiver interviews guess the right function 3 out of 4 times. Use the interview to pick your first probe, then confirm with extinction if the FA stays muddy.

You can save hours by testing one payoff at a time. If the FA is unclear, pick the most likely function from your open-ended interview and run a five-minute extinction probe. When the behavior drops, you have your answer and your treatment in one step.