By Matt Harrington, BCBA · Behaviorist Book Club · Research-backed answers for behavior analysts
Multiple alternative prompting presents the learner with two or more response options alongside the target stimulus, requiring them to select the correct tact label from the alternatives provided. Unlike a single vocal verbal prompt, which models one correct response for the learner to imitate, MAP embeds an active discrimination component into the prompting procedure. The learner must attend to the target stimulus and differentiate it from foils to respond correctly. Over time, alternatives are faded or made more similar to the target, moving the learner toward independent tacting controlled entirely by the stimulus.
Leaf's study used an adapted alternating-treatments design with three participants with ASD to compare MAP directly with vocal verbal prompting for tact acquisition. Both procedures were effective relative to a no-intervention control. MAP did not increase error rates or teaching time compared to standard vocal prompting. The critical finding was that tacts taught with MAP showed better maintenance than those taught with vocal verbal prompts — a clinically meaningful advantage that suggests MAP produces more durable stimulus control over the tact response.
An adapted alternating-treatments design was used, which rapidly alternates between two or more conditions within and across sessions for the same participant. This design is particularly appropriate for comparing instructional procedures because it controls for confounds like maturation, history effects, and differences between participants that would complicate between-group comparisons. The rapid alternation ensures that any observed differences in acquisition or maintenance are attributable to the procedure rather than to extraneous variables, making the conclusions directly applicable to individual clinical decision-making.
Acquisition accuracy reflects performance under the conditions of training — often with prompting, reinforcement, and massed practice — which may not represent the learner's actual command of the behavior. Maintenance probes, conducted after training ends without supplemental prompts or reinforcement, reveal whether the stimulus control established during training is durable and generative. Skills that fail maintenance have not achieved functional verbal behavior — the learner cannot use them independently in natural settings. Maintenance is therefore the more clinically valid indicator of effective tact instruction.
Foils should be meaningfully distinct from the target label initially to support accurate discrimination without excessive difficulty. As the learner demonstrates consistent correct responding, foils can be made progressively more similar to the target — phonologically similar words, semantically related labels, or items from the same category — to increase discrimination demands and strengthen stimulus control. Foils should not include the learner's most common error responses without careful monitoring, as this can increase error rates. The foil set should be reviewed regularly and adjusted based on error pattern analysis.
Prompt fading for MAP involves progressively reducing the response support provided by the alternatives. Strategies include: increasing the delay before alternatives are presented, requiring the learner to attempt the tact before alternatives are offered; reducing the number of alternatives from three to two to zero; making foils progressively more similar to the target to increase discrimination demand; and introducing transfer trials where the stimulus is presented without any alternatives to test for independent tacting. The fading schedule should be data-driven, advancing only when the learner demonstrates consistent correct responding at the current level.
The alternating-treatments design allows direct comparison of two procedures within a single participant, producing within-subject evidence that one procedure is more effective than another. At the research level, this eliminates the confounds of between-group designs. At the clinical level, BCBAs can use a similar logic — assigning equivalent target sets to two different procedures and comparing acquisition and maintenance outcomes for a specific learner — to generate individualized data that guides program design. This clinical analog to ATD is more feasible than it may appear and produces directly actionable information.
Maintenance probes should be scheduled at predetermined intervals after mastery criteria are met — common schedules include 1 week, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks post-mastery. Probes are conducted under baseline conditions: the stimulus is presented without prompting, and no reinforcement is provided for correct responses beyond brief social acknowledgment. Targets failing maintenance probes (typically defined as accuracy falling below the mastery criterion) should re-enter the acquisition phase with a modified procedure. Probe data should be graphed separately from acquisition data and reviewed at clinical supervision sessions.
Yes, with appropriate modifications. For learners with limited discrimination repertoires, initial foil sets should include items from highly distinct stimulus categories rather than semantically similar labels. The number of alternatives should be minimal — two options initially — and the response format may need to be modified to match the learner's current response repertoire (e.g., pointing to pictures rather than vocal selection if the learner has limited vocal output). As discrimination skills develop through MAP practice and parallel receptive discrimination training, the foil complexity and number can be increased systematically.
Code 2.01 requires practitioners to use evidence-based practices and to remain current with the scientific literature. Code 6.01 requires recommending the least intrusive, most effective intervention. Leaf's MAP research contributes to the evidence base that Code 2.01 references, providing comparative data that supports more informed procedure selection. The maintenance findings are particularly relevant because Code 2.01 also implies that effectiveness should be evaluated not just on immediate acquisition but on durable behavior change — a standard that maintenance probing directly addresses.
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Ready to go deeper? This course covers this topic with structured learning objectives and CEU credit.
Multiple Alternative Prompts | Learning | 0.5 Hours — Autism Partnership Foundation · 0.5 BACB General CEUs · $0
Take This Course →0.5 BACB General CEUs · $0 · Autism Partnership Foundation
Research-backed educational guide with practice recommendations
Side-by-side comparison with clinical decision framework
All behavior-analytic intervention is individualized. The information on this page is for educational purposes and does not constitute clinical advice. Treatment decisions should be informed by the best available published research, individualized assessment, and obtained with the informed consent of the client or their legal guardian. Behavior analysts are responsible for practicing within the boundaries of their competence and adhering to the BACB Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts.