Functional analysis and treatment of self-injurious behavior in young children a summary of 30 cases.

Putnam et al. (2003) ran 30 functional analyses on 1- to young learners who hit, bit, or banged their heads. Each child got a short, play-based test where adults gave or took away toys, attention, or demands.

Sessions lasted 5 minutes and used toys the child already liked. The team watched which condition made the SIB spike. They then built a function-matched treatment, usually functional communication training.

The test found a clear reason for the behavior in 62 % of the toddlers. Attention was the top payoff, followed by escape from demands and access to items.

After the test, 71 % of treated kids got FCT. Problem behavior dropped in every case where the right reinforcer was found.

Marcell et al. (1988) gave teachers a 16-question checklist called the Motivation Assessment Scale. It predicted reinforcers without any 5-minute sessions. Putnam et al. (2003) show the full functional analysis still wins when you need certainty with tiny kids.

Ledbetter-Cho et al. (2016), Bergstrom et al. (2012), and Crosbie (1993) all used behavioral skills training to teach safety or social skills to preschoolers with autism. F et al. add the other side of the coin: first find why problem behavior happens, then teach a replacement.

You can run a 5-minute functional analysis on a toddler. Use toys, keep it play-based, and stop when you see the pattern. Once you know the reinforcer, FCT is the ready-made fix. No guesswork, no long checklist—just test, pick the function, and teach the child to ask instead of hurt.