Unit 7 Flashcards
Functional analysis (FA)
An analysis of the purposes (functions) of problem
behavior, wherein antecedents and consequences
representing those in the person’s natural routines
are arranged within an experimental design so that
their separate effects on problem behavior can be
observed and measured.
-May be necessary for some functions, but not always sufficient
Possible causes of undifferentiated functional
analysis results
- Difficulties in discrimination
- Relevant variables not tested
- Multiple control
- Low rates of behavior
Strategies for clarifying functional analysis
results
- Enhance motivation
- Add discriminative stimuli
- Vary the control condition
Problems with standard functional analysis in
the assessment of low-rate problem behavior
• Behavior may occur infrequently, producing
undifferentiated FA results
• Behavior may occur infrequently, producing
differentiated by inconclusive results
Strategies for conducting functional analyses
of low-rate problem behavior
• Extended session length
• Probes conducted at times when behavior is at
high strength
Concerns with standard functional analysis in
the assessment of high-risk problem behavior
• Problem behavior must occur to measure
patterns of behavior, putting the participant
and/or therapists at risks of harm
• Potentially reinforcing events are provided
contingent on problem behavior
Methods of reducing risks during functional
analysis
- Time-limited assessments
- Use of protective equipment
- Alternative response measures
Precursor behavior
“Behavior that reliably precede the occurrence of
another behavior”
How to calculate conditional probabilities of
precursor behavior
Divide the number of times precursor behavior occur
within 10-s before a problem behavior by the number of precursor behaviors overall
Lag-sequential analysis
Used to assess the probability of precursors at any
moment in time (every second) before and after an
instance of problem behavior
Borrero & Borrero (2008)- high risk & lag sequential analysis
Results of the descriptive analysis showed that the probability of the potential precursor was greater given problem behavior compared to the unconditional probability of the potential
precursor. Results of the lag-sequential analyses showed a marked increase in the probability of a potential precursor in the 1-s intervals immediately preceding an instance of problem behavior, and that the probability of problem behavior has highest in the 1-s intervals immediately following an instance of the precursor. Results of the functional analysis showed that both problem behavior and the precursor served the same operant functions.
Crosland et al. (2003)
Results showed that Risperidone had a differential
effect across behavioral function and topography.
Mechanisms underlying effectiveness of Risperidone may differ across behavioral functions and topographies
Implications of functional analysis of early
intervention
• Results suggest operant processes play an
important role in early development of SIB and
problem behavior.
• Early identification/intervention critical, before
lengthy history of reinforcement is established.
• Inclusion of caregivers as therapist may have
advantages as they provide strong environmental
influence on early behavior
Richman et al. (1999)
Indicated that different response categories may form a response class hierarchy. When different responses are simultaneously reinforced in a functional analysis, more severe forms of aberrant behavior may not occur, thus limiting the ability to clearly analyze behavioral functions.
Problems with combining different
topographies within a single response
category in a functional analysis
• Can result in functional analysis outcomes that
are inconclusive or undifferentiated
• Erroneous or incomplete interpretation of
functional analysis outcomes may result in
evaluation of interventions that are ineffective or
even harmful
Inconclusive or undifferentiated functional
analysis outcomes may occur when:
• Multiple topographies controlled by different
reinforcers, but data evaluated in aggregate
fashion.
• One or more of target behaviors maintained by
automatic reinforcement
• Target behaviors represent a response class
hierarchy and functional analysis contingencies are
provided for all topographies or aberrant
behavior
Iwata et al. (2000)
Results showed that participants scored a relatively
high percentage of correct therapist responses during baseline, and that all achieved an accuracy level of 95% of higher following training that lasted about 2 hr. These results suggest that basic skills for conducting functional analyses can be acquired
quickly by individuals who have relative little clinical
experience.
Kurtz et al. (2003)
undifferentiated results for SIB in very young children
Smith & Churchill (2002)- high risk behavior & precursors
Results showed that when contingencies placed on target behavior, precursors reliably occurred at high levels in same condition. When contingencies placed on precursors,
1) similar outcomes for precursors,
and 2) target behavior notably lower
Kahng, Abt, and Schonbachler (2001)- low rate bx and extended FA sessions
Functional analysis of low-rate aggression was
conducted during extended observation periods and
showed behavior to be maintained by positive
reinforcement. Treatment consisted of variable momentary differential reinforcement of other
behavior and was successful in reducing problem
behavior throughout these extended observation
periods.
-10 min to 7 hours
Tarbox et al. (2004)- low rate behaviors and “drop everything” meyhod
• Standard FA yielded inconclusive results across
participants
• Differentiated results obtained during low-rate FA
-Condition initiated upon an occurrence of problem bx
Thompson et al. (1998)
Results showed that aggregate functional analysis of aggression resulted in inconclusive results. Results of a second functional analysis for different topographies confirmed that chin grinding maintained by automatic reinforcement and other aggression maintained by attention.
It demonstrated that different topographies within a
single response category can be members of separate operant classes.
Najdowski et al. (2008)- high risk bxs and precursors
Results showed that none of the participants engaged in problem behaviors during their FAs when contingencies were placed on precursors
(differentiated results were obtained for all
participants). Treatments were found to eliminate
precursor behavior, possibly prevented occurrences
of severe problem behavior.
Did not systematically id precursors
Derby et al. (1994)- combined vs. separate topographies
Results showed that evaluating FA results when topographies are combined or separated suggest that different response categories belonging to different operant classes may be obscured by aggregate examination of functional assessment data.
Extinction analysis
Procedure that can be conducted when more severe forms of problem behavior do not occur during a functional analysis
Richmond et al. (1999)- response class hierarchy
Results indicated that a clear analysis of behavior function may be limited when different responses are simultaneously reinforced in a functional analysis because more severe forms of aberrant behavior may not occur.
Wacker et al (1998)
Reeve and Carr (2000)
Suggested that the use of functional analyses may be applicable to very young children with early onset SIB
The pharmacological basis for drug selection
Typically based on topographical features of problem behavior
Borrero et al. (2002)
Results revealed that the use of protective equipment during functional analysis of SIB suppressed levels of responding such that a behavioral function could not be identified
Advantages of combining functional analysis
methods with drugs trials
• More clearly determine if results of a functional
analysis serve as useful predictors of drug
response
• Provide indications of when treatment with
certain drugs is contraindicated
• Provide insight into the interaction of drug
treatment and learned functions
Areas related to conducting functional
analysis that require training
• Make professional judgments related to date
interpretation
• Make modification of assessment conditions to
identify idiosyncratic maintaining variables
• Assess risk management
• Deliver a prescribed sequence of antecedent and
consequent events while interacting with a client
Thomason, et. al (in press)
FA for high risk bx- two independent FAs, with same contingencies, but one looked at latency measures.
