By Matt Harrington, BCBA · Behaviorist Book Club · April 2026 · 12 min read

A BCBA's Guide to Functional Analysis and Treatment of Arranging and Ordering in Autism

Overview & Clinical Significance

Arranging and ordering behaviors, such as lining up objects, sorting items by category, or insisting on precise spatial configurations, are among the restricted and repetitive behaviors that define autism spectrum disorder. Despite being a core diagnostic feature, these behaviors have received comparatively little research attention in the applied behavior analysis literature, particularly regarding their behavioral functions and evidence-based treatment approaches.

The clinical significance of this topic is substantial for several reasons. First, arranging and ordering behaviors can significantly interfere with learning, social engagement, and daily living activities. A child who spends extended periods lining up toys rather than engaging in functional play misses critical opportunities for social learning, language development, and cognitive growth. When attempts to interrupt these behaviors trigger severe challenging behavior such as aggression, self-injury, or property destruction, the impact on the individual and family becomes even more pronounced.

Second, the functional analysis of arranging and ordering behaviors challenges behavior analysts to think carefully about the role of automatic reinforcement. Unlike behaviors maintained by social contingencies such as attention, escape, or access to tangibles, automatically reinforced behaviors are maintained by the sensory or perceptual consequences they produce. This distinction has critical implications for assessment methodology and treatment selection because traditional functional analysis conditions that manipulate social contingencies may fail to identify the maintaining variables for behaviors that produce their own reinforcement.

The research by Rodriguez, Thompson, Schlichenmeyer, and Stocco (2012) that forms the basis of this course represents an important contribution because it directly addressed the functional analysis and treatment of these specific behaviors using rigorous single-subject experimental methodology. Their work demonstrates that arranging and ordering behaviors can be systematically assessed using modified functional analysis procedures and that function-based treatments can effectively reduce these behaviors while providing appropriate alternatives.

Third, this topic has important implications for how behavior analysts conceptualize and respond to restricted and repetitive behaviors more broadly. The field has historically focused more heavily on socially maintained challenging behaviors, and practitioners may lack confidence in assessing and treating behaviors maintained by automatic reinforcement. Building competence in this area is essential for providing comprehensive, evidence-based services to individuals with autism.

For practicing behavior analysts, understanding the functional analysis and treatment of arranging and ordering behaviors represents a critical clinical competency that directly affects the quality of services provided to a substantial portion of clients on the autism spectrum.

Background & Context

Restricted and repetitive behaviors have been recognized as a defining feature of autism spectrum disorder since the earliest descriptions of the condition. The current diagnostic criteria in the DSM-5 include insistence on sameness, inflexible adherence to routines, and highly restricted, fixated interests as examples of restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior. Arranging and ordering behaviors fall squarely within this diagnostic category, yet they have received far less empirical attention than other forms of repetitive behavior such as stereotypy.

The functional analysis methodology that has been the gold standard for identifying the environmental variables maintaining challenging behavior was originally developed for behaviors maintained by social contingencies. The standard functional analysis includes conditions that test for attention, escape, tangible, and alone or automatic reinforcement functions. For socially maintained behaviors, these conditions provide clear and interpretable results. However, for behaviors maintained by automatic reinforcement, the standard functional analysis typically shows elevated responding across all conditions or elevated responding only in the alone condition, which indicates automatic reinforcement but does not specify the particular sensory or perceptual consequences maintaining the behavior.

This limitation has prompted researchers to develop modified functional analysis procedures for automatically reinforced behaviors. These modifications often involve manipulating the specific sensory or perceptual consequences of the behavior rather than social consequences. For arranging and ordering behaviors specifically, this means examining whether the behavior is maintained by the visual or tactile consequences of achieving a particular spatial arrangement, the process of manipulating objects into specific positions, or some other perceptual outcome.

The distinction between the process of arranging and the product of arrangement is clinically important. Some individuals may engage in arranging behavior because the act of placing objects in order is reinforcing, similar to how some people find the act of sorting or organizing inherently satisfying. Others may engage in arranging behavior because the completed arrangement produces a specific visual configuration that is reinforcing. Still others may find both the process and the product reinforcing. Understanding which aspect maintains the behavior has direct implications for treatment design.

Treatment approaches for automatically reinforced behaviors have evolved considerably. Early approaches often relied heavily on punishment-based procedures or response interruption and redirection. More contemporary approaches emphasize functional treatments that address the maintaining reinforcer directly, such as providing matched alternative stimulation, enriching the environment with competing reinforcers, or teaching appropriate alternative behaviors that produce similar sensory consequences.

The research by Rodriguez, Thompson, Schlichenmeyer, and Stocco (2012) built on this foundation by conducting systematic functional analyses of arranging and ordering behaviors in individuals with autism and developing individualized treatments based on the identified functions. Their methodology included manipulating access to both the process and product of arranging to determine which component maintained the behavior, which represents a sophistication in functional analysis methodology that is directly applicable to clinical practice.

Clinical Implications

The clinical implications of this research extend across the full spectrum of assessment and treatment for restricted and repetitive behaviors in individuals with autism. For practicing behavior analysts, these findings provide both a framework for approaching arranging and ordering behaviors and specific methodological guidance for assessment and intervention.

In assessment, the primary clinical implication is the need for modified functional analysis procedures when evaluating arranging and ordering behaviors. Standard functional analysis conditions may produce undifferentiated results because the behavior is not maintained by social contingencies. Practitioners should design assessment conditions that specifically manipulate the sensory and perceptual consequences of arranging, including separate conditions that test the reinforcing value of the process of arranging versus the product of a completed arrangement.

Practically, this might involve conditions in which the individual has free access to materials and can both arrange and view the completed arrangement, conditions in which the individual can arrange materials but the completed arrangement is disrupted before they can view it, conditions in which a completed arrangement is presented without the individual having arranged it, and control conditions in which arranging materials are not available. Comparing behavior across these conditions reveals whether the process, the product, or both maintain the behavior.

For treatment design, the functional analysis results directly inform the selection of intervention components. If the process of arranging is the primary reinforcer, treatments might include providing alternative activities that involve similar motor actions, such as sorting tasks or construction activities, that are more adaptive and less interfering. If the product is the primary reinforcer, treatments might involve providing visual stimuli that approximate the reinforcing visual configuration without requiring the repetitive arrangement process, or allowing brief scheduled access to completed arrangements as a reinforcer for engagement in other activities.

Non-contingent reinforcement schedules that provide the identified reinforcer on a time-based schedule independent of the target behavior can reduce the establishing operation for arranging and ordering behaviors. If the visual product is reinforcing, for example, providing access to visually ordered stimuli throughout the day on a dense schedule may reduce the motivation to engage in arranging behaviors during learning activities.

Differential reinforcement procedures should be tailored to the identified function. Differential reinforcement of alternative behavior is most effective when the alternative produces a consequence that matches or approximates the consequence maintaining the target behavior. For arranging and ordering, appropriate alternatives might include structured sorting activities, pattern completion tasks, or organizational routines that channel the underlying behavioral tendency into productive activities.

Response interruption and redirection remains a viable treatment component, particularly when combined with functional replacement behaviors, but practitioners should be cautious about using this procedure in isolation. Interrupting an automatically reinforced behavior without providing an appropriate alternative is likely to produce emotional responding, resistance, and poor maintenance of treatment effects.

Generalization planning is particularly important for arranging and ordering behaviors because these behaviors often occur across a wide range of materials and settings. Treatment should be designed to address the general behavioral class rather than specific instances, and programming for generalization should include exposure to novel materials and settings during treatment.

Ethical Considerations

The assessment and treatment of arranging and ordering behaviors raises several important ethical considerations that behavior analysts must carefully navigate. These considerations reflect broader questions about how the field approaches restricted and repetitive behaviors in individuals with autism.

The first and most fundamental ethical question is whether a particular arranging or ordering behavior actually requires intervention. The BACB Ethics Code (2022), Code 2.01, requires behavior analysts to provide effective treatment, but it also requires that treatment targets be selected based on the best interest of the client. Not all restricted and repetitive behaviors are harmful or significantly interfering. An individual who arranges their personal belongings in a specific order but does not become distressed when this is disrupted and does not miss important learning or social opportunities as a result may not require intervention for this behavior. Behavior analysts must resist the temptation to target behaviors simply because they appear unusual or because others in the environment find them annoying.

Code 2.14 (Selecting, Designing, and Implementing Behavior-Change Interventions) requires behavior analysts to consider the broader impact of interventions on the client's life. Reducing arranging and ordering behaviors without providing appropriate alternatives or without understanding the function these behaviors serve may have unintended negative consequences. For some individuals, arranging behaviors may serve a self-regulatory function, helping them manage anxiety or sensory overload. Removing this coping strategy without replacement could lead to increases in other, potentially more problematic behaviors.

The perspectives of autistic self-advocates are highly relevant to this ethical analysis. Many autistic adults describe their restricted interests and repetitive behaviors as sources of genuine pleasure, comfort, and identity. They argue that behavior analysts should focus on reducing behaviors that cause harm or significant interference rather than behaviors that are merely different from neurotypical norms. This perspective aligns with the ethical principles of client dignity and self-determination embedded in the Ethics Code.

Code 2.15 (Minimizing Risk of Behavior-Change Interventions) requires behavior analysts to select the least restrictive effective intervention. For arranging and ordering behaviors, this means prioritizing antecedent-based strategies, environmental modifications, and reinforcement-based approaches before considering more intrusive procedures. Response blocking or physical interruption of arranging behaviors should only be used when less restrictive approaches have been attempted and found insufficient, and when the behavior poses a genuine risk to the individual or significantly interferes with critical learning opportunities.

Informed consent is particularly important in this area. Families and caregivers should understand the rationale for targeting arranging and ordering behaviors, the proposed assessment and treatment procedures, the expected outcomes and potential risks, and the alternative of not intervening. When the individual is capable of participating in treatment decisions, their preferences and perspective should be actively sought and incorporated.

Code 2.13 (Selecting Behavior-Change Interventions) requires that behavior analysts select interventions based on the results of a functional assessment. This standard is directly relevant because it prohibits the use of predetermined treatment packages for arranging and ordering behaviors without first understanding their function. A behavior analyst who automatically applies response interruption and redirection to all instances of arranging behavior without conducting a functional analysis is not meeting this ethical standard.

The research methodology itself raises ethical considerations about conducting functional analysis procedures that may temporarily increase the target behavior or produce emotional responding. These assessments must be conducted with appropriate safeguards, including clear discontinuation criteria and provisions for addressing any distress that arises during assessment.

Assessment & Decision-Making

Effective assessment and decision-making for arranging and ordering behaviors requires a systematic approach that begins with careful description and progresses through functional assessment to treatment selection and monitoring.

The initial assessment phase should focus on precisely describing the arranging and ordering behaviors exhibited by the individual. This includes identifying the specific topographies of arranging behavior, such as lining up objects in rows, sorting by color or size, stacking, or positioning items in precise locations. It also includes documenting the range of materials involved, the settings in which the behaviors occur, the duration and frequency of episodes, and the consequences of interruption. This descriptive information forms the foundation for all subsequent assessment and treatment decisions.

Before proceeding to functional analysis, practitioners should conduct a thorough indirect assessment including caregiver and teacher interviews, review of existing records, and systematic observation in natural settings. Key questions to address include when the behavior first appeared and how it has changed over time, which materials or categories of materials occasion the behavior most reliably, whether the behavior occurs more in some settings or conditions than others, what happens when the behavior is interrupted and how the individual responds, and whether the behavior appears to serve any adaptive function such as self-regulation or organization.

The functional analysis methodology should be tailored to the specific characteristics of the behavior. As described in the research by Rodriguez, Thompson, Schlichenmeyer, and Stocco (2012), conditions should be designed to separate the reinforcing value of the process of arranging from the reinforcing value of the completed arrangement. Practitioners should also include standard functional analysis conditions to rule out social functions, as some arranging behaviors may be partially maintained by attention or tangible consequences in addition to automatic reinforcement.

Data from the functional analysis should be analyzed both visually and in terms of practical significance. Clear differentiation between conditions indicates the maintaining variable. Undifferentiated high responding across all conditions may suggest automatic reinforcement but warrants further analysis with more refined assessment conditions. Low responding in the alone condition combined with high responding in social conditions suggests a social function that may have been missed in initial hypotheses.

Treatment selection should flow directly from the functional analysis results. The decision-making framework should consider the identified function and whether the process, product, or both maintain the behavior. It should evaluate the severity of interference, distinguishing mild interference that might be addressed with environmental accommodations from severe interference requiring active intervention. It should weigh the individual's preferences and the extent to which they express a desire to continue or change the behavior. It should also assess the availability of appropriate alternative behaviors that can serve a similar function.

Progress monitoring should include measures of both the target arranging and ordering behavior and the broader outcomes that motivated intervention. If intervention was initiated because arranging behavior was interfering with learning, then data on learning outcomes should be collected alongside data on arranging frequency. If the behavior was targeted because it triggered aggressive behavior when interrupted, then data on both arranging and aggression should be monitored. This comprehensive monitoring ensures that treatment is producing meaningful improvement in the individual's life, not just a reduction in the target behavior.

What This Means for Your Practice

For practicing behavior analysts, the functional analysis and treatment of arranging and ordering behaviors represents an area where the gap between research methodology and common clinical practice may be significant. Many practitioners encounter these behaviors regularly but may default to generic treatment approaches rather than conducting the specific functional analysis procedures needed to identify maintaining variables.

Begin by reviewing your current caseload for clients who exhibit arranging and ordering behaviors. For each, evaluate whether a functional analysis has been conducted that specifically tested automatic reinforcement hypotheses and whether the current treatment is functionally based. If not, consider whether a more precise assessment would lead to more effective intervention.

When you encounter arranging and ordering behaviors in new clients, resist the urge to immediately implement treatment. Instead, take time to carefully describe the behavior, understand its context, and design a functional analysis that addresses the specific hypotheses relevant to automatically reinforced behavior. This investment in thorough assessment typically pays dividends in more efficient and effective treatment.

Develop your clinical skills in designing and interpreting modified functional analysis conditions for automatically reinforced behaviors. This may require consultation with colleagues who have expertise in this area, review of the relevant research literature, or pursuit of continuing education specifically focused on the assessment and treatment of restricted and repetitive behaviors.

Finally, engage in thoughtful conversations with families about the role of arranging and ordering behaviors in their child's life. Some families may prioritize reducing these behaviors because of the interference they cause, while others may view them as a relatively benign expression of their child's neurology. Your role is to provide accurate information about what assessment reveals, what treatment options are available, and what the potential outcomes and risks of intervention are, while respecting the family's values and the individual's preferences.