Teaching tolerance to ‘No’ and compliance with

instructions
Based on: Hanley, Jin, Vanserlow, Hanratty (2014)
LEVEL 1: Simple FCT

Learner Teacher
1 or 2 word/ 1 icon PEC mand (“iPad”) “Ok”; immediately reinforce with requested item

• Teach the learner a simple functional communication response (FCR) to gain access to their preferred
activates.
• Select this response based on the learner’s language abilities and the reinforcers that are maintaining
the problem behaviour.
• Problem behavior should be put on extinction and access to preferred activities only provided
contingent on the FCR.
LEVEL 2: Complex FCT

Learner Teacher
“Excuse me”/ tap shoulder “Yes”

3 to 5 word mand (“May I have iPad please”)/ “Sure”; immediately reinforce with requested item
PECS sentence strip

• Once the learner is emitting independent FCRs for a specified number of sessions without engaging in
problem behavior, increase the complexity of the response.
• Teach the learner to request attention and wait for adult acknowledgement before emitting a more
developmentally appropriate response.
• This is important to develop social interaction.
LEVEL 3: Teach Tolerance to Delay and Denial
Sub Level 1
50% of FCRs:
Learner Teacher
“Excuse me”/ tap shoulder “Yes”
3 to 5 word / PECS sentence strip mand for iPad “Sure”; immediately reinforce with requested item
Other 50% of FCRs:
“Excuse me” “Yes”
3 to 5 word / PECS sentence strip mand for iPad “No/ maybe later/ not now / wait/ hold on”
Take a breath, “Ok”/ thumbs up “Ok, you can have iPad”

• Once the learner acquires independent complex FCR without engaging in problem behavior, teach a
tolerance response to ‘No’ after 50% of FCTs.
• At this level, the tolerance response should be immediately reinforced without requiring the learner to
wait or engage in low preferred activities – you are only requiring the learner to hear the denial and
express ‘Ok’.
• Problem behavior should remain on extinction and access to preferred activities only provided
contingent on the FCR.
LEVEL 3: Teach Tolerance to Delay and Denial
Sub-level 2: delay with alternative activity

50% of FCRs immediately reinforced (as above)

Other 50% of FCRs:
“Excuse me” / tap shoulder “Yes”
3 to 5 word / PECS sentence strip mand for iPad “No/ maybe later/ not now… let’s go to play first”
“Ok” / thumbs up Bring to play for very short duration
Complies with instruction to go play “Ok, you can have iPad now”

• Once the learner is emitting the tolerance response to the denial cue without engaging in problem
behavior, introduce a delay to reinforcement by requiring the learner to engage in alternative activities,
these may be preferred or neutral activities.
• Denials should still only occur after 50% of FCRs (the other 50% of FCRs are followed by immediate
reinforcement).
LEVEL 3: Teach Tolerance to Delay and Denial
Sub-level 3: delay with less preferred activity
50% of FCRs immediately reinforced (as above)
Other 50% of FCRs:
“Excuse me” “Yes”
3 to 5 word / PECS sentence strip mand for iPad “No/ maybe later/ not now… first hang up your
bag”
“Ok” / thumbs up Allow to engage in instruction
Complies with instruction “Ok, you can have iPad now”
• Once the learner is emitting the tolerance response to the denial cue and engaging in the alternative
activities without engaging in problem behavior, require the learner to engage in less preferred
activities.
• Begin with very simple and brief instructions.
• Other requests should be listed in advance according to their level of difficulty and be increased very
gradually.
LEVEL 3: Teach Tolerance to Delay and Denial
Sub-level 4: delay with non-preferred activities / tolerance of aversive situations
50% of FCRs immediately reinforced (as above)
Other 50% of FCRs:
Learner Teacher
“Excuse me” “Yes”
3 to 5 word / PECS sentence strip mand for iPad “No/ maybe later/ not now, let’s work first”
“Ok” Present non-preferred activity
Complies with instructions “Ok, you can have iPad now”

• Once the learner is emitting the tolerance response to the denial cue and engaging in the less-preferred activities
without engaging in problem behavior, begin to teach tolerance of non-preferred activities or aversive situations.

• Select these activities based on what usually causes problem behavior (i.e. the behavior you want to increase
without engagement in problem behavior).

• Complexity and duration of instructional periods should only be increased when FCR remain independent and the
rate of targeted problem behavior is zero. Keep instructional periods varied, so that sometimes the delay is short or
simple and sometimes it is longer or more complex. Delays are contingency based, not time based, and used to
teach skills. The learner should start to spend more time engaging in adult instruction and less time engaging in
preferred activities.
LEVEL 3: Teach Tolerance to Delay and Denial
Sub-level 5: Increase number of denials from 50% to 75%

• Begin to increase the number of FCRs that are followed by a delay and engagement in non-
preferred activities; so that 60% (3/5) of FCR are followed by delay and 40% (2/5) of FCRs
should continue to be followed by immediate reinforcement. This is important to maintain
FCRs.
• The end goal of this level should be to increase the frequency of FCR denials to 75%, so that
25% of the time FCRs remain immediately reinforced.
• If any problem behaviours resurge during this stage, differential reinforcement can be used.
Compliance with instructions during the delay can be reinforced with longer and higher
quality reinforcers; while problem behaviours or non-compliance during delays can result in
relatively brief or lower quality reinforcers.
LEVEL 4: Treatment Extension

To achieve practical and meaningful treatment gains, the intervention should be extended to
relevant situations outside the center. Select these settings based on situations that have been
identified as troublesome through observation or as identified by caregivers, and in accordance
to the learner’s initial goals.
Caregivers should be coached on implementation of the intervention during typical situations in
the home environment (preferably parents are involved from the beginning of FCT and
throughout the intervention).
References

Producing Meaningful Improvements In Problem Behavior Of Children With Autism Via Synthesized Analyses
And Treatments

Gregory P. Hanley, C. Sandy Jin, Nicholas R. Vanselow, And Laura A. Hanratty

Western New England University