These answers draw in part from “Relational Frame Theory: How Do We Assess These Repertoires?” by Teresa Mulhern (BehaviorLive), and extend it with peer-reviewed research from our library of 27,900+ ABA research articles. Clinical framing, BACB ethics code references, and cross-links below are synthesized by Behaviorist Book Club.
View the original presentation →Derived relational responding refers to the emergence of novel stimulus relations without direct reinforcement — the ability to respond to stimuli in terms of their relations to other stimuli based on arbitrary contextual cues. For example, if a client learns that A equals B, and B equals C, derived relational responding allows them to recognize that A equals C without explicit training. This capacity underlies a vast range of language functions including comprehension of analogies, metaphors, rules, and social narratives. Clinically, deficits in derived relational responding can explain why a client has acquired many directly trained skills but struggles with generalization, inference, and the flexible application of language to novel contexts.
Clinical RFT assessments typically probe the major relational frame families: coordination (same as), distinction (different from), opposition (opposite of), comparison (more/less than), temporal (before/after, first/last), causal (causes/results in), hierarchical (type of/has), spatial (above/below, inside/outside), and deictic or perspective-taking frames (I/you, here/there, now/then). Each frame is assessed using multiple-stimulus probes that evaluate whether the client can derive novel relations within that frame. The clinical priority given to specific frames is determined by the client's current functional repertoire, developmental level, and the language and social demands of their environment.
VB-MAPP and similar verbal behavior assessments measure the acquisition of directly trained verbal operants — mands, tacts, listener skills, intraverbals — and provide developmental benchmarks for skill sequencing. RFT-based assessment, by contrast, probes for derived relational responding — skills that emerge from the relational network rather than from direct training. A client might have a robust tact and mand repertoire but limited derived relational responding, explaining gaps in comprehension, flexible language use, and social cognition that VB-MAPP does not capture. The two assessment approaches are complementary, with RFT-based tools providing a layer of analysis relevant to more complex language and cognitive functioning.
The PEAK Relational Training System, developed by Mark Dixon, provides the most comprehensive commercially available assessment and curriculum framework for relational framing skills. PEAK's Equivalence and Transformation modules specifically target derived relational responding across the major frame types. Research protocols used in the experimental RFT literature also provide detailed probe methodologies that clinicians can adapt. Teresa Mulhern's session addresses practical assessment approaches for clinic settings, including structured probe sequences and decision criteria for interpreting results. The field does not yet have a single gold-standard normed assessment tool for relational repertoires; practitioners should be familiar with the tools available and their respective psychometric limitations.
RFT-based assessment is appropriate when a client has established foundational prerequisite skills: a basic tact and listener repertoire, some intraverbal responding, and the ability to respond to simple comparative and categorical relations. For clients still acquiring basic mand and tact skills, RFT assessment is premature and the focus should remain on building foundational verbal operants. For clients who have progressed beyond basic verbal behavior programming and demonstrate a need for more complex language targets — or who show inconsistent generalization despite adequate direct instruction — RFT assessment becomes clinically relevant. There is no firm developmental age cutoff; clinical judgment based on the client's current repertoire determines appropriateness.
Intervention targets are derived from the relational profile that assessment produces: a mapping of which frames are robustly established, which are emerging (present inconsistently or only with partial accuracy), and which are absent. Emerging frames are typically the most efficient intervention targets, as they require refinement and extension of already-present repertoires rather than building entirely from scratch. Frame prioritization should also consider functional relevance — which frames are prerequisites for the client's current social, academic, or vocational goals — and developmental sequence, targeting frames that form the foundation for more complex relational responding. The resulting intervention plan specifies target frames, training exemplar structures, and generalization probes.
Multiple exemplar training (MET) is the primary teaching methodology for establishing relational frames. Because relational responding is generalized — it must occur across novel stimuli, settings, and contexts — effective training must use a sufficiently diverse range of training exemplars to prevent stimulus control from becoming narrowed to specific trained stimuli. MET involves training relations across multiple stimulus sets, systematically varying the exemplars while keeping the relational rule constant, and probing regularly for derived responding with untrained stimulus combinations. Research indicates that sufficient exposure to multiple exemplars eventually produces the spontaneous emergence of derived relations — the hallmark of a trained relational frame rather than rote stimulus control.
Many social skills targets — understanding another person's perspective, recognizing the causal relationship between one's behavior and another's emotional response, comprehending social rules and their exceptions, and navigating ambiguous social situations — require intact relational repertoires. Perspective-taking, in particular, is directly modeled by deictic (I/you, here/there, now/then) relational frames. Assessing the status of these frames before implementing social skills programming identifies whether the foundational relational repertoire is in place. When it is not, inserting RFT-focused relational training as a prerequisite skill prior to complex social skills instruction can dramatically improve the efficiency and generalization of social programming.
Common challenges include: the time investment required for systematic multi-frame assessment in busy clinic settings; the technical demands of designing valid probe procedures that correctly assess derived responding rather than rote memorization; interpreting results when clients show partial or inconsistent derived responding that does not cleanly fit 'present' or 'absent' categories; and communicating assessment findings and their implications to families and non-BCBA team members in accessible language. Additionally, the limited normative data for most available tools makes it difficult to contextualize a client's relational profile relative to developmental expectations, requiring practitioners to rely more heavily on clinical judgment in interpretation.
Mulhern's focus on practical assessment methods addresses one of the genuine gaps in the applied RFT literature: the distance between robust theoretical and experimental work and the clinical tools practitioners need to use RFT-based approaches in everyday practice. By presenting structured assessment methodologies for clinic settings — rather than laboratory-grade research protocols — Mulhern's work makes RFT assessment accessible to practicing BCBAs who have conceptual familiarity with the theory but lack practical implementation guidance. This translational contribution is essential for expanding the impact of RFT beyond research contexts and into the full range of clinical populations that could benefit from individualized relational frame assessment and training.
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.
Relational Frame Theory: How Do We Assess These Repertoires? — Teresa Mulhern · 1 BACB General CEUs · $0
Take This Course →We extended these answers with research from our library — dig into the peer-reviewed studies behind the topic, in plain-English summaries written for BCBAs.
280 research articles with practitioner takeaways
195 research articles with practitioner takeaways
183 research articles with practitioner takeaways
1 BACB General CEUs · $0 · BehaviorLive
Research-backed educational guide with practice recommendations
Side-by-side comparison with clinical decision framework
You earn CEUs from a dozen different places. Upload any certificate — from here, your employer, conferences, wherever — and always know exactly where you stand. Learning, Ethics, Supervision, all handled.
No credit card required. Cancel anytime.
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.