Advertisement

Impact of Presession Access to Toys Maintaining Challenging Behavior on Functional Communication Training: a Single Case Study

  • Tonya N. Davis
  • Mark F. O’Reilly
  • Soyeon Kang
  • Mandy Rispoli
  • Russell B. Lang
  • Wendy Machalicek
  • Jeffrey M. Chan
  • Giulio Lancioni
  • Jeff Sigafoos
Original Article

Abstract

We implemented functional communication training (FCT) with a child with Pervasive Developmental Disorder-Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS) who exhibited challenging behavior when preferred toys were removed. Prior to FCT sessions the participant was exposed to 15 min of access to the toys that maintained challenging behavior versus no access. The presession access versus no access conditions were systematically evaluated using an alternating treatments design. Results indicate that presession access to the toys was associated with a decrease in challenging behavior and an increase in independent communication during FCT training. Future research should attempt to replicate these procedures with other participants who exhibit challenging behavior.

Keywords

Autism spectrum disorders Challenging behavior Developmental disability Functional communication training Motivating operations 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Capitol School of Austin.

References

  1. Carr, E. G., & Durand, V. M. (1985). Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 111–126.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Fisher, W., Piazza, C., Cataldo, M., Harrell, R., Jefferson, G., & Conner, R. (1993). Functional communication training with and without extinction and punishment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 23–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Lang, R., O’Reilly, M., Sigafoos, J., Lancioni, G. E., Machalicek, W., Rispoli, M., et al. (in press). Enhancing the effectiveness of a play intervention by abolishing the reinforcing value of stereotypy for a child with autism: a pilot study. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.Google Scholar
  4. Mancil, G. R., Contory, M. A., Nakao, T., & Alter, P. J. (2006). Functional communication training in the natural environment: a pilot investigation with a young child with autism spectrum disorder. Education and Treatment of Children, 29, 615–633.Google Scholar
  5. McGill, P. (1999). Establishing operations: implications for the assessment, treatment, and prevention of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 393–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Michael, J. (1982). Distinguishing between discriminative and motivational functions of stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 149–155.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. O’Neill, R. E., & Sweetland-Baker, M. (2001). Brief report: an assessment of stimulus generalization and contingency effects in functional communication training with two students with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 31, 235–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. O’Reilly, M. F., Sigafoos, J., Edrisinha, C., Lancioni, G., Cannella, H., Choi, H., et al. (2006). A preliminary examination of the evocative effects of the establishing operation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39, 239–242.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. O’Reilly, M. F., Edrisinha, C., Sigafoos, J., Lancioni, G., Machalicek, W., & Antonucci, M. (2007). The effects of presession attention on subsequent attention-extinction and alone conditions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 731–735.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. O’Reilly, M. F., Sigafoos, J., Lancioni, G., Rispoli, M., Lang, R., Chan, J., et al. (2008). Manipulating the behavior-altering effect of the motivating operation: examination of the influence on challenging behavior during leisure activities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 29, 333–340.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. O’Reilly, M. F., Lang, R., Davis, T., Rispoli, M., Machalicek, W., Sigafoos, J., et al. (in press). A systematic examination of different parameters of presession exposure to tangible stimuli that maintain challenging behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. Google Scholar
  12. Reichle, J., & Wacker, D. (1993). Communicative alternatives to challenging behavior: Integrating functional assessment and intervention strategies. Baltimore: Brookes.Google Scholar
  13. Rispoli, M., O’Reilly, M., Lang, R., Machalicek, W., Davis, T., Lancioni, G., et al. (in press). Effects of motivating operations on aberrant behavior and academic engagement in classrooms. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.Google Scholar
  14. Schopler, E., & Reichler, R. J. (1980). Toward an objective classification of childhood autism: childhood autism rating scale (C.A.R.S.). Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 10, 91–103.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Sigafoos, J. (2000). Communication development and aberrant behavior in children with developmental disabilities. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 35(2), 168–176.Google Scholar
  16. Sparrow, S. S., Balla, D. A., & Ciccheti, D. V. (1984). Vineland adaptive behavior scales. Circle Pines: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tonya N. Davis
    • 1
  • Mark F. O’Reilly
    • 2
  • Soyeon Kang
    • 2
  • Mandy Rispoli
    • 3
  • Russell B. Lang
    • 4
  • Wendy Machalicek
    • 5
  • Jeffrey M. Chan
    • 6
  • Giulio Lancioni
    • 7
  • Jeff Sigafoos
    • 8
  1. 1.Department of Educational PsychologyBaylor UniversityWacoUSA
  2. 2.The Meadows Center for Preventing Educational RiskThe University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA
  3. 3.Texas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  4. 4.University of California, Santa BarbaraSanta BarbaraUSA
  5. 5.University of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA
  6. 6.Northern Illinois UniversityDeKalbUSA
  7. 7.University of BariBariItaly
  8. 8.Victoria University at WellingtonWellingtonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations