Functional Communication Training

Functional communication training (FCT) is a differential reinforcement of an alternative behavior in which the alternative behavior is a socially appropriate, generally recognized communication response. In most cases, clinicians implementing FCT place challenging behavior on extinction, but this is not a requirement of FCT. In order to implement FCT, a clinician must first conduct a functional analysis to identify the function of the target challenging behavior. Next, the clinician selects a communication response that requires low response effort and is within the client’s repertoire. A mand assessment is helpful for this process. During the group supervision meeting, you will share relevant concepts and terminology with your supervisees, followed by you supervisees delivering short presentations on recent FCT research. Before the individual supervision meeting without a client, your supervisee will conduct a mand assessment with their client. You will use these results to develop an individualized FCT protocol. During the final meeting, you will observe your supervisee implementing FCT and then deliver performance feedback.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic €32.70 /Month

Get 10 units per month
Download Article/Chapter or eBook
1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
Cancel anytime

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

eBook EUR 106.99 Price includes VAT (France)

Softcover Book EUR 137.14 Price includes VAT (France)

Hardcover Book EUR 210.99 Price includes VAT (France)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

References

Carr, E. G., & Durand, V. M. (1985). Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18(2), 111–126. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Davis, T. N., Weston, R., Hodges, A., Uptegrove, L., Williams, K., & Schieltz, K. M. (2018). Functional communication training and demand fading using concurrent schedules of reinforcement. Journal of Behavioral Education, 27(3), 343–357. ArticleGoogle Scholar
Derby, K., Fisher, W. W., Piazza, C. C., Wilke, A. E., & Johnson, W. (1998). The effects of noncontingent and contingent attention for self-injury, manding, and collateral responses. Behavior Modification, 22, 474–484. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Durand, V. (1999). Functional communication training using assistive devices: Recruiting natural communities of reinforcement. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 247–267. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Falcomata, T., & Wacker, D. P. (2013). On the use of strategies for programming generalization during functional communication training: A review of the literature. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 25(1), 5–15. ArticleGoogle Scholar
Fisher, W. W., Piazza, C. C., Cataldo, M. F., Harrell, R., Jefferson, G., & Conner, R. (1993). Functional communication training with and without extinction and punishment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 23–36. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Gerow, S., Davis, T., Radhakrishnan, S., Gregori, E., & Rivera, G. (2018). Functional communication training: The strength of evidence across disabilities. Exceptional Children, 85(1), 86–103. ArticleGoogle Scholar
Hagopian, L. P., Fisher, W. W., Sullivan, M. T., Acquisto, J., & LeBlanc, L. A. (1998). Effectiveness of functional communication training with and without extinction and punishment: A summary of 21 inpatient cases. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 211–235. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Hagopian, L. P., Boelter, E. W., & Jarmolowicz, D. P. (2011). Reinforcement schedule thinning following functional communication training: Review and recommendations. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 4(1), 4–16. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Hernandez, E., Hanley, G. P., Ingvarsson, E. T., & Tiger, J. H. (2007). A preliminary evaluation of the emergence of novel mand forms. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40(1), 137–156. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Horner, R. H., & Day, H. M. (1991). The effects of response efficiency on functionally equivalent competing behaviors. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24(4), 719–732. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Landa, R. K., Hanley, G. P., Gover, H. C., Rajaraman, A., & Ruppel, K. W. (2022). Understanding the effects of prompting immediately after problem behavior occurs during functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 55(1), 121–137. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Matter, A. L., & Zarcone, J. R. (2017). A comparison of existing and novel communication responses used during functional communication training. Behavioral Interventions, 32(3), 217–224. ArticleGoogle Scholar
Peck, S. M., Wacker, D. P., Berg, W. K., Cooper, L. J., Brown, K. D., Richman, D., et al. (1996). Choice-making treatment of young children’s severe behavior problems. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 263–290. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Richman, D. M., Wacker, D. P., & Winborn, L. (2001). Response efficiency during functional communication training: Effects of effort on response allocation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34(1), 73–76. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Ringdahl, J. E., Falcomata, T. S., Christensen, T. J., Bass-Ringdahl, S. M., Lentz, A., Dutt, A., & Schuh-Claus, J. (2009). Evaluation of a pretreatment assessment to select mand topographies for functional communication training. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30, 330–341. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Ringdahl, J. E., Berg, W. K., Wacker, D. P., Ryan, S., Ryan, A., Crook, K., & Molony, M. (2016). Further demonstrations of individual preference among mand modalities during functional communication training. Journal of developmental and physical disabilities, 28(6), 905–917. Google Scholar
Tiger, J. H., Hanley, G. P., & Bruzek, J. (2008). Functional communication training: A review and practical guide. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(1), 16–23. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Winborn, L., Wacker, D. P., Richman, D. M., Asmus, J., & Geier, D. (2002). Assessment of mand selection for functional communication training packages. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 295–298. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Baylor University, Waco, TX, USA Tonya N. Davis & Jessica S. Akers

Tonya N. Davis

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Electronic Supplementary Material

(PPTX 509 KB)

Appendices

Appendix A: Selecting a Recognized Mand

Scenario One: Rashid’s FBA concluded that his challenging behavior is maintained by access to attention from his mom and dad. Rashid communicates with a speech-generating device with a static display of four icons.

Recognizable FCR 1: ________________________________________________
Recognizable FCR 2: ________________________________________________
Unrecognizable FCR 1: _______________________________________________
Unrecognizable FCR 2: ______________________________________________

Scenario Two: Marcella’s FBA concluded that her challenging behavior is maintained by access to her My Little Ponies. Marcella communicates with two- and three-word vocalizations.

Recognizable FCR 1: ________________________________________________
Recognizable FCR 2: ________________________________________________
Unrecognizable FCR 1: ______________________________________________
Unrecognizable FCR 2: ______________________________________________

Scenario Three: Stella’s FBA concluded that her challenging behavior is maintained by escaping chores in her group home, including washing dishes and taking out the trash. Stella communicates with one-word vocal approximations and two-word phrases on a speech generating application on her tablet computer.

Recognizable FCR 1: ________________________________________________
Recognizable FCR 2: ________________________________________________
Unrecognizable FCR 1: ______________________________________________
Unrecognizable FCR 2: ______________________________________________

Scenario Four: Dominic’s FBA concluded that his challenging behavior is maintained by access to his preferred snacks, including a yogurt cup. Dominic communicates with a picture exchange system and is currently able to communicate by placing two cards on a sentence strip.

Recognizable FCR 1: ________________________________________________
Recognizable FCR 2: ________________________________________________
Unrecognizable FCR 1: _______________________________________________
Unrecognizable FCR 2: _______________________________________________

Scenario Five: Abby’s FBA concluded that her challenging behavior is maintained by access to attention from a paraprofessional in her classroom, Ms. Robins. Abby communicates with a picture exchange system and is currently able to select a single picture from an array of 10 and hand it to her communication partner.

Recognizable FCR 1: ________________________________________________
Recognizable FCR 2: ________________________________________________
Unrecognizable FCR 1: ______________________________________________
Unrecognizable FCR 2: _______________________________________________

Appendix B: Selecting a Mand That Requires Low Response Effort

Low Response Effort: ________________________________________________
High Response Effort: ________________________________________________

Scenario Two: Marcella’s FBA concluded that her challenging behavior is maintained by access to her My Little Ponies. Marcella communicates with two- and three-word vocalizations.

Low Response Effort: ________________________________________________
High Response Effort: ________________________________________________

Low Response Effort: ________________________________________________
High Response Effort: ________________________________________________

Low Response Effort: ________________________________________________
High Response Effort: ________________________________________________

Low Response Effort: ________________________________________________
High Response Effort: ________________________________________________

Appendix C: Teaching and Reinforcing the FCR

figure h

Scenario Two: Marcella’s FBA concluded that her challenging behavior is maintained by access to her My Little Ponies. Marcella communicates with two- and three-word vocalizations.

figure i

figure j

figure k

figure l

Appendix D: Mand Topography Assessment: Instructions and Data Sheet

figure m

Appendix E: Mand Topography Assessment: Sample Data Sheets

figure n

figure o

figure p

Appendix F: FCT Planning Guide

figure q

Appendix G: FCT: Procedural Fidelity Checklist Template

figure r

Appendix H: FCT Role-Play Data Collection

figure s

Rights and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Davis, T.N., Akers, J.S. (2022). Functional Communication Training. In: A Behavior Analyst’s Guide to Supervising Fieldwork. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-09932-8_25

Download citation

.RIS
.ENW
.BIB

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-09932-8_25
Published : 06 January 2023
Publisher Name : Springer, Cham
Print ISBN : 978-3-031-09931-1
Online ISBN : 978-3-031-09932-8
eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Get shareable link

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Copy to clipboard

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative