Relational Frame Theory (RFT) is a modern technique that falls under the umbrella of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA), utilized alongside other corresponding strategies such as positive reinforcement, discrete trial training (DTT), and pivotal response training (PRT). A theory of language based on contextual interactions, Relational Frame Theory was developed to synthesize several psychological phenomena into one coherent theory. Irony, sarcasm, humor, and language generativity are all included in these complex processes. RFT has increased in popularity because of its ability to address these issues, and to help clients engage in more fluid and flexible social behavior. What we know now about human behavior can be used with RFT in a truly revolutionary way that has significant and intriguing implications for almost every part of human behavior.
How Relational Frame Theory Helps Children in ABA Programs
Successful ABA treatment programs, which generally prioritize language and communication, are built on Skinner’s behavioral philosophy and his functional analysis of language. However, one of the most notable drawbacks was that ABA had trouble targeting emerging, unique speech utterances or the generativity that is distinctive of natural human language, considered to be due to the lack of an operational definition for more complicated human language and cognition processes. However, researchers can easily replicate RFT principles in a clinical setting. Operational definitions ensure that there is no need to make guesses about things that can’t be observably measured.
The Relational Frame Theory literature exemplifies an observable behavioral analysis of how people make connections, take perspectives, and respond in a relationship. Children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and/or intellectual disabilities can now benefit from innovative approaches to early intervention based on behavioral research that incorporate relational response, generativity, and other intricate features of language.
It has been observed that people with autism have trouble communicating verbally and detecting social cues, navigating arbitrary concepts, perspective making, creating connections between unrelated concepts, dealing with the unpredictability of their surroundings, and rigid adherence to routines. A lack of derived relational responding (DRR) and arbitrarily applicable relational responding (AARR), a uniquely human learning process, is thought to underlie these observed problematic behaviors.
How Relational Frame Theory Works
According to Relational Frame Theory, human cognition and communication are based on our ability to recognize and create connections from the things around us, primarily facilitated by our arbitrarily applicable relational response (AARR). Typically developing humans can seemingly spontaneously generalize new learning into previously learned material without direct teaching. This ability, given that it is fueled by language, tends to be very impaired in individuals with ASD. Due to social structures, regulations, and social mores that are typically implied from the surroundings, the process of AARR is verbal in nature. As the complexity of the stimuli in the environment rises, so does the difficulty in navigating the relations that require a strong AARR repertoire. As language is the foundation of AARR and relational framing, it is logical to assume that many people with ASD have considerable difficulties in these areas. However, individuals with autism don’t all have the same deficits in AARR, so it’s impossible to generalize.
Perspective-taking is a common area where we may see significant deficits in individuals with autism. Theory of mind can be described as the aptitude to interpret another person’s emotional state and use that information to understand other individuals’ intentions or make predictions about their behavior. In other words, it’s the ability to see things from the viewpoint of others, part of a set of skills necessary for forming close bonds with friends and family. For individuals with ASD, it is typical to have social communication and engagement challenges, which may also include an incapability to see things from another person’s perspective. Your child hasn’t developed their perspective-taking skills if they giggle and move their body around while playing hide and seek. Understanding someone’s perspective also helps us understand sarcasm, whether someone is lying or whether someone is teasing us for fun or with mean intentions. Focusing on perspective-taking skills within linguistic and social behavior activities is critical to the development of positive interpersonal relationships.
Humans have developed the ability to generalize and expand our knowledge from very specific situations to far broader ones; this helps us gather and comprehend massive amounts of information and networks of conceptual frameworks. Responses that have never been explicitly taught but can be learned by linking concepts together are referred to as derived relational responding (DRR) in this context. In a nutshell, relating can be described as the act of responding to one situation in the terms of another.
Connections between concepts are at the heart of language, and Relational Frame Theory is built on this foundation. Humans can link experiences, as well as words and meanings across interconnected networks. For example, if you told a child that whales live in the sea but that another word for sea is “ocean,” they could easily associate the new word “ocean” with the place where whales swim. From then on, this child will be just as happy if you tell them you’re going on a day trip “to the sea” or “to the ocean.”
The ability to perform improvised responses that have never explicitly been taught has been exemplified through many areas of research, even with animals. Relating may be simply defined as responding to one event in terms of another. We can see this connection through another example using coins. If you were to tell a child that a one Euro coin was worth more than a fifty-cent coin, most verbally-adept children would be able to explain to you that the fifty-cent coin is worth less than the one Euro coin, even though its size is larger. In this example, therefore, the more-than and less-than relationships between the two coins are mainly composed because they are not based on the physical characteristics of the two coins. In fact, they are the opposite. In part, because it involves verbal communication and is based on language and social mores or constructs, people with autism can have difficulty with this type of response.
An incredible characteristic of our brains sets the groundwork for the development of verbal, body, and written language. This process of relational formation is performed through the development of what researchers refer to as relational frames, or the associations we build between concepts based on stimuli or reinforcement from our environment.
Relational frames are like a blueprint of current understanding. For example, you could tell a child who sees many sorts of snakes at the zoo that they are a creature known as “snakes.” This same child would be able to identify a snake they had never seen before in their garden bed as a “snake” because they have developed what is called a relational frame or coordination, or sameness in that living creatures that move around without legs and with slithering tongues are the same and what we call “snakes.”
Perhaps the most complex relational frame involves deictic relations that emphasize the individual’s abstract relationship to their environment in relation to others and may change over time. The child determines the context of the relationship. Because of the past relationships with other stimuli or events, stimuli might now produce unique behaviors in different contexts, which is known as a transformation of stimulus function.
Transformation can be explained in simple terms; more specifically, if A and C are connected, and B is related to one or both of A and C, the nature of the connection between A and C may be altered. For example, a child loves going to a particular park and has fun going all the way to the top level of the play structure. One day, this child gets stung by a bee while in the play structure. Suddenly, the child no longer wants to visit the park because they now associate the park with getting stung by a bee, an adverse event.
Individuals with ASD face significant obstacles due to a lack of a functional and extensive AARR skillset. Even though classic ABA techniques are highly effective, they are insufficient to address the deeper cognitive impairments that individuals with ASD display compared to their typically-developing peers. Learners with ASD who lack a relational repertoire must learn through what is referred to as direct-acting reinforcement. Complex rules and the capacity to apply existing knowledge in new ways are hindered by deficiencies in AARR.
How Apollo Behavior Helps Your Child With Relational Frame Theory
Apollo’s BCBAs use the only current empirically-validated assessment, the PEAK Comprehensive Assessment (PCA), to evaluate DRR and AARR. The PEAK (Promoting Emergent Advanced Knowledge) RFT-based assessment evaluates a child’s repertoire for relational response skills and provides specific directions for re-teaching those skills if they are found to be insufficient, at all levels from primary to advanced. In fact, the PEAK program has rapidly gained scientific backing for its correlation with standardized cognitive capacity and aptitude measures. Relational response’s essential role in language and higher cognitive functions has prompted researchers to include it alongside other well-established behavioral techniques like positive reinforcement in ABA curriculums.
In order to address deficiencies in DRR and AARR, PCA results are used to develop individualized treatment plans. Clinical data and experienced professionals agree that early identification of difficulties with AARR can help clients with autism create meaningful connections with their typically-developing peers. The rapid remediation of these deficits may be vital to improving outcomes.
If you have concerns about your child’s current program and are looking for a different provider, contact us today to see how Apollo Behavior can transition your child’s development program to one of our cutting-edge facilities at Johns Creek, East Cobb and Lawrenceville locations.
References:
Barnes-Holmes, Y., Barnes-Holmes, D., & McHugh, L. (2004). Teaching derived relational responding to young children. Journal Of Early And Intensive Behavior Intervention, 1(1), 3-12. doi: 10.1037/h0100275
Foody, M., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Barnes-Holmes, D., Törneke, N., Luciano, C., Stewart, I., & McEnteggart, C. (2014). RFT for clinical use: The example of metaphor. Journal Of Contextual Behavioral Science, 3(4), 305-313. doi: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.08.001
Johansson, R. (2019). Arbitrarily applicable relational responding. International Conference on Artificial General Intelligence. Springer, Cham.
Relational Frame Theory and its Applications in Autism Treatment Plans
What is Relational Frame Theory?
Relational Frame Theory (RFT) is a modern technique that falls under the umbrella of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA), utilized alongside other corresponding strategies such as positive reinforcement, discrete trial training (DTT), and pivotal response training (PRT). A theory of language based on contextual interactions, Relational Frame Theory was developed to synthesize several psychological phenomena into one coherent theory. Irony, sarcasm, humor, and language generativity are all included in these complex processes. RFT has increased in popularity because of its ability to address these issues, and to help clients engage in more fluid and flexible social behavior. What we know now about human behavior can be used with RFT in a truly revolutionary way that has significant and intriguing implications for almost every part of human behavior.
How Relational Frame Theory Helps Children in ABA Programs
Successful ABA treatment programs, which generally prioritize language and communication, are built on Skinner’s behavioral philosophy and his functional analysis of language. However, one of the most notable drawbacks was that ABA had trouble targeting emerging, unique speech utterances or the generativity that is distinctive of natural human language, considered to be due to the lack of an operational definition for more complicated human language and cognition processes. However, researchers can easily replicate RFT principles in a clinical setting. Operational definitions ensure that there is no need to make guesses about things that can’t be observably measured.
The Relational Frame Theory literature exemplifies an observable behavioral analysis of how people make connections, take perspectives, and respond in a relationship. Children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and/or intellectual disabilities can now benefit from innovative approaches to early intervention based on behavioral research that incorporate relational response, generativity, and other intricate features of language.
It has been observed that people with autism have trouble communicating verbally and detecting social cues, navigating arbitrary concepts, perspective making, creating connections between unrelated concepts, dealing with the unpredictability of their surroundings, and rigid adherence to routines. A lack of derived relational responding (DRR) and arbitrarily applicable relational responding (AARR), a uniquely human learning process, is thought to underlie these observed problematic behaviors.
How Relational Frame Theory Works
According to Relational Frame Theory, human cognition and communication are based on our ability to recognize and create connections from the things around us, primarily facilitated by our arbitrarily applicable relational response (AARR). Typically developing humans can seemingly spontaneously generalize new learning into previously learned material without direct teaching. This ability, given that it is fueled by language, tends to be very impaired in individuals with ASD. Due to social structures, regulations, and social mores that are typically implied from the surroundings, the process of AARR is verbal in nature. As the complexity of the stimuli in the environment rises, so does the difficulty in navigating the relations that require a strong AARR repertoire. As language is the foundation of AARR and relational framing, it is logical to assume that many people with ASD have considerable difficulties in these areas. However, individuals with autism don’t all have the same deficits in AARR, so it’s impossible to generalize.
Perspective-taking is a common area where we may see significant deficits in individuals with autism. Theory of mind can be described as the aptitude to interpret another person’s emotional state and use that information to understand other individuals’ intentions or make predictions about their behavior. In other words, it’s the ability to see things from the viewpoint of others, part of a set of skills necessary for forming close bonds with friends and family. For individuals with ASD, it is typical to have social communication and engagement challenges, which may also include an incapability to see things from another person’s perspective. Your child hasn’t developed their perspective-taking skills if they giggle and move their body around while playing hide and seek. Understanding someone’s perspective also helps us understand sarcasm, whether someone is lying or whether someone is teasing us for fun or with mean intentions. Focusing on perspective-taking skills within linguistic and social behavior activities is critical to the development of positive interpersonal relationships.
Humans have developed the ability to generalize and expand our knowledge from very specific situations to far broader ones; this helps us gather and comprehend massive amounts of information and networks of conceptual frameworks. Responses that have never been explicitly taught but can be learned by linking concepts together are referred to as derived relational responding (DRR) in this context. In a nutshell, relating can be described as the act of responding to one situation in the terms of another.
Connections between concepts are at the heart of language, and Relational Frame Theory is built on this foundation. Humans can link experiences, as well as words and meanings across interconnected networks. For example, if you told a child that whales live in the sea but that another word for sea is “ocean,” they could easily associate the new word “ocean” with the place where whales swim. From then on, this child will be just as happy if you tell them you’re going on a day trip “to the sea” or “to the ocean.”
The ability to perform improvised responses that have never explicitly been taught has been exemplified through many areas of research, even with animals. Relating may be simply defined as responding to one event in terms of another. We can see this connection through another example using coins. If you were to tell a child that a one Euro coin was worth more than a fifty-cent coin, most verbally-adept children would be able to explain to you that the fifty-cent coin is worth less than the one Euro coin, even though its size is larger. In this example, therefore, the more-than and less-than relationships between the two coins are mainly composed because they are not based on the physical characteristics of the two coins. In fact, they are the opposite. In part, because it involves verbal communication and is based on language and social mores or constructs, people with autism can have difficulty with this type of response.
An incredible characteristic of our brains sets the groundwork for the development of verbal, body, and written language. This process of relational formation is performed through the development of what researchers refer to as relational frames, or the associations we build between concepts based on stimuli or reinforcement from our environment.
Relational frames are like a blueprint of current understanding. For example, you could tell a child who sees many sorts of snakes at the zoo that they are a creature known as “snakes.” This same child would be able to identify a snake they had never seen before in their garden bed as a “snake” because they have developed what is called a relational frame or coordination, or sameness in that living creatures that move around without legs and with slithering tongues are the same and what we call “snakes.”
Perhaps the most complex relational frame involves deictic relations that emphasize the individual’s abstract relationship to their environment in relation to others and may change over time. The child determines the context of the relationship. Because of the past relationships with other stimuli or events, stimuli might now produce unique behaviors in different contexts, which is known as a transformation of stimulus function.
Transformation can be explained in simple terms; more specifically, if A and C are connected, and B is related to one or both of A and C, the nature of the connection between A and C may be altered. For example, a child loves going to a particular park and has fun going all the way to the top level of the play structure. One day, this child gets stung by a bee while in the play structure. Suddenly, the child no longer wants to visit the park because they now associate the park with getting stung by a bee, an adverse event.
Individuals with ASD face significant obstacles due to a lack of a functional and extensive AARR skillset. Even though classic ABA techniques are highly effective, they are insufficient to address the deeper cognitive impairments that individuals with ASD display compared to their typically-developing peers. Learners with ASD who lack a relational repertoire must learn through what is referred to as direct-acting reinforcement. Complex rules and the capacity to apply existing knowledge in new ways are hindered by deficiencies in AARR.
How Apollo Behavior Helps Your Child With Relational Frame Theory
Apollo’s BCBAs use the only current empirically-validated assessment, the PEAK Comprehensive Assessment (PCA), to evaluate DRR and AARR. The PEAK (Promoting Emergent Advanced Knowledge) RFT-based assessment evaluates a child’s repertoire for relational response skills and provides specific directions for re-teaching those skills if they are found to be insufficient, at all levels from primary to advanced. In fact, the PEAK program has rapidly gained scientific backing for its correlation with standardized cognitive capacity and aptitude measures. Relational response’s essential role in language and higher cognitive functions has prompted researchers to include it alongside other well-established behavioral techniques like positive reinforcement in ABA curriculums.
In order to address deficiencies in DRR and AARR, PCA results are used to develop individualized treatment plans. Clinical data and experienced professionals agree that early identification of difficulties with AARR can help clients with autism create meaningful connections with their typically-developing peers. The rapid remediation of these deficits may be vital to improving outcomes.
If you have concerns about your child’s current program and are looking for a different provider, contact us today to see how Apollo Behavior can transition your child’s development program to one of our cutting-edge facilities at Johns Creek, East Cobb and Lawrenceville locations.
References:
Barnes-Holmes, Y., Barnes-Holmes, D., & McHugh, L. (2004). Teaching derived relational responding to young children. Journal Of Early And Intensive Behavior Intervention, 1(1), 3-12. doi: 10.1037/h0100275
Foody, M., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Barnes-Holmes, D., Törneke, N., Luciano, C., Stewart, I., & McEnteggart, C. (2014). RFT for clinical use: The example of metaphor. Journal Of Contextual Behavioral Science, 3(4), 305-313. doi: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2014.08.001
Johansson, R. (2019). Arbitrarily applicable relational responding. International Conference on Artificial General Intelligence. Springer, Cham.
Recent Posts
Categories