Unit 9- 2 Flashcards by Kathleen Dugan

An experimental approach to assessment in which behavior is observed repeatedly underworld to find a test and control conditions, Which are characterized by the presence and absence of suspected maintaining variables.

Experimental manipulation

Functional analysis

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Any formal method used to identify sources of reinforcement that maintain problem behaviors

Functional assessment

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

An experimental method that involves manipulating antecedents and consequences to determine their effect on behavior

Seeks to demonstrate a functional relationship between the problem behavior and environmental event

Functional analysis

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

When conducting a bit… You do not manipulate the environment in anyway. You simply observe events as they naturally occur

Descriptive assessment

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Functional analysis is a type of

Functional assessment

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Change in the independent variable produces orderly and predictable change in the dependent variable
IV-= environmental event
DV - behavior

Functional analysis is the process of identifying independent variables that are functionally related to behavior

Functional relation. And functional analysis are Term introduced by Skinner

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Process of identifying independent variables that are functionally related to behavior. Can take many many forms

Functional analys I

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Assumptions
Behavior problems are learned performance.
Adaptive and maladaptive behaviors are learned in the same manner

Purpose of a functional analysis
To identify the maintaining variable, source of reinforcement, for a behavior.
Remember: the function of the behavior is more important than the topography of the behavior

Can also tell us the conditions under which the behavior is unlikely to occur

Functional analysis of behavior disorders

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

The purpose of a functional analysis is to

Identify the maintaining variable for a behavior

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Early functional analysis study: controlled by a single contingency, SR+

Self injury us behavior increased one followed by sympathetic statement

One child with SIB:
Noncontingent attention resulted in decreased in SIB
Contingent attention resulted in increase in SIB
Ignored resulted in illuminating SIB

Lovaas

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Lovaas

Carr
Berkson

Early functional analysis studies; controlled by a single contingency,

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Early functional analysis study controlled by a single contingency negative enforcement

Two conditions: demand versus no demand
No problem consequence for problem behavior

Results: SIB and aggression higher in the demand conditions

Social negative reinforcement?

Carr

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Early functional analysis studies: controlled by a single contingency automatic reinforcement

Environment with activities versus environment with no activities

Sterotypy higher in impoverished environment Suggesting that stereo to pay was not maintained by Social reinforcement and thereby was likely maintained by automatically enforcement

Berkson has and Mason

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Direct observation

Measurement of behavior under test controlled conditions

Basic features of functional analysis

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Identification of functional relations through manipulation of suspected controlling variables

Example enforcement versus no reinforcement for target behavior
Condition A. Test- sneeze – bless you positive enforcement?
Condition B, control – sneeze – no response, extinction
Higher levels of behavior and Test condition as compared to control condition suggests We have the maintaining reinforcer

Measurement of behavior Under Test and control conditions

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Positive reinforcement:
Social, (attention, access to materials/tangible)

Negative reinforcement:
Social, (escape from demands
Automatic, pain attenuation

Each of these was tested separately in the earlier single contingency studies

No one had yet put them all together in a single assessment

Learned functions of behavior

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

There are two essential features of functional analysis that were established in early studies. One is direct observation. What is the other

Measurement of behavior under test and control conditions

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Indicated when:
Descriptive analysis does not provide sufficient information for formulating reasonable hypothesis

Although many believe a this should always be conducted

Intervention based on hypothesis generated from descriptive analysis are not producing the desired behavior change and no further adjustments are indicated by the data or other information

When there is a huge time and resource investment in training a large number of staff across a number of relevant environments to perform the requisite of the select a behavior change strategies.

Functional analysis methodology

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Common forms:

Durand Carr functional analysis
Emphasis on the antecedent especially establishing operation during each condition: e.g. attention delivered at different rates during the test and control conditions ( FT- 30’s versus continuous attention

Iwata functional analysis
Emphasis on antecedents and consequences for the behavior during each condition

Functional analysis methodology

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Created a general model for concurrently assessing the sensitivity of SIB to contingencies of

Social positive reinforcement
Social negative reinforcement
Automatic reinforcement

Each test condition contains in establishing operation, discriminative stimulus, and source of reinforcement

These things are absent in the control condition

Iwata et al

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Purpose: to test a specific hypothesis about the controlling variables for problem behavior. Must include a control condition, which doesn’t have the antecedents and consequences related to hypothesis

The conditions are repeatedly administered in response rates are measured

Typically use a multi element design

Line graphs are used to detect differences between the test condition and the control condition

Controlling variables revealed when the rate of behavior in the test is consistently higher the control

Remember, standard functional analysis will have multiple test conditions to compare against the control condition only

Functional analysis methodology

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Procedure

Dependent variables: SIB, define individually: partial interval recording

Protection from risk

Medical exam, exclusion of high-risk
Criterion for risk of stabbers by a physician
Session terminated if criterion met
Post session exams by a nurse
Weekly case review

Iwata procedures functional Analysis

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Attention
Demand
Alone
Play

Sometimes tangibles

Functional analysis protocol/conditions

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

What is the relevant establishing operation in the demand condition

The presence of the demands

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Functional assessment of behavior disorders One behavior is maintained by different functions – the usual meaning Behaviors that are typographically distinct may be maintained by the same function

Multiple control

Functional assessment interpretation: there is not clear separation between any condition and the control condition

Undifferentiated patterns of problem behavior during a functional analysis

Probable causes: Difficulties in discrimination Relevant variables not tested Multiple control Maybe more likely for a low rate behaviors Simply do not occur during FA such that all conditions equals your rates

Undifferentiated Patterns

Each test individually compared to the control condition or to a uniquely arranged control Multiple tasks can be elevated relative to the control Multiple control? One behavior maintained by different functions Automatic reinforcement? Highly preferred toys only available in control condition These toys compete with behavior is maintained by automatic reinforcement Attention, demand, lawn equals no toys equals high rate of behavior

Functional analysis interpretation

Implementing and evaluating treatments can help you figure out what do you have multiple control or automatically enforcement

Multiple control

Iwata conditions included attention, demand, alone and play but no tangibles Should we include tangibles

Tangible conditions

Purpose: to determine if behavior was actually multiply controlled or represented iatrogenic effects Subject: 26-year-old female with profound DD Dependent variable: frequency of hand it to mouth contact

Shirley, Iwata

Procedure Preference assessment Functional analysis: attention, demand, alone, play, tangible Changeable condition run with several different stimuli Descriptive Assessment to identify what items delivered in home after problem behavior Use the most commonly delivered item intangible condition

Shirley, procedures functional Analysis

Purpose: will A new response be acquired more readily and a tangible reinforcement relative to other conditions of functional analysis Will problem behavior that does not have a social function emerge under a tangible condition? Study 1: susceptibility to tangible reinforcement Preference assessment Functional analysis: target behavior: frequency of arbitrary response. Conditions: alone attention tangible demand play ``` Study 2. False positive functional assessment outcomes. Functional assessment stereotopy Descriptive assessment of Comparison of tangible conditions Alone. Tangible PA. Stereotyp - HD Edible Tangible DA:Stereo – DA item ```

False positive FA outcomes Rooker Purpose: well I knew response be acquired more readily and a tangible reinforcement relative to other conditions of a functional analysis Will probably behavior that does not have a social function emerge under a tangible condition

What is the main limitation of the Carr and iwata A B functional analysis

Did not manipulate the consequences so problem behavior is actually on Extinction

Name another experimental design other than the multi element, that can be used in a functional analysis

Pairwise

Multi element, reversal, pairwise

Functional assessment designs

Enhance motivation operations Fixed sequence of conditions such that each condition establishes the establishing operation for the reinforcer tested in a subsequent condition Eg alone equals attention Program to pre-session deprivation Alter response measurement Evaluate and place consequences on only one Topography rather than multiple, at a time Minimizes chances of undifferentiated results due to multiple control Vary the control condition Manner in which attention is delivered, FT 30 – S versus continuous Types of leisure items available Highly preferred toys during attention condition may compete with attention reinforcer Alone as control for negative reinforcement because SD, I E, person with history of delivering the man’s, and establishing operation, instructions, and contingency are absent

Clarifying functional assessment outcomes Typical experimental design: Multi element

Two additional experimental designs that could be used to enhance discrimination in functional analysis

Reversal pairwise

Rapidly alternate between conditions. Problem: possible lack of discrimination between conditions

Multi element design

Rapidly alternate between conditions. Possible lack of discrimination between conditions

Multi element

Fairly common More efficient than reversal One test condition alternated with control May assist in discriminability of conditions

Pairwise functional Analysis to sign

Written for clinicians in practice Why. Yes with functional assessment as a practitioner? Indirect assessment is unreliable. Only good when you care about clients verbal report as the behavior of interest Descriptive assessment also not your friend. Even bijou Said so Can’t tell positive me force meant from negative reinforcement Often. Points to attention

Iwata and Dozier

1. Limited Assessment time: solution: brief functional assessment. Test a single function. 3. Potentially dangerous behavior Solution: precursor assessment and latency functional assessment 3. Limited control over the environment Solution: trial based FA

Three potential constraints. Practitioner sometimes don’t think they can run functional assessments. These are the reasons they site. Iwata n Dozier

To conduct a brief FA (BFA) Of aggression plus a contingency reversal, replacement R – DRA Within 90 minute outpatient appointment Subjects: first three referred for aggression Dependent variables: aggression, I’ll probably behaviors, Mands (all 6 second partial interval) Conditions:alone, attention, demand, tangible Each condition typically only run for one session. Standard FHA involved at least three sessions per condition. If time allows the condition with problem behavior is repeated Contingency reversal: to identify potentially effective intervention Condition with highest level of problem behavior in functional analysis A equals reinforcement for PB; extinction for Mands B equals reinforcement forMANDS, extinction for problem behavior Concluded as BAB

Northrop brief FA

In summary, you can shorten the functional analysis for used in outpatient settings by conducting a BFA with only one session for condition Contingency reversal: demonstrated that you could teach someone to ask for the reinforcer that maintains problem behavior and this would decrease problem behavior Done with a 90 minute appointment You can use functional analysis even if you are very limited with time

Northrop

Brief FA vs full FA Brief FA – not much contact with contingencies Discrimination may occur with an a session but overall session rates may obscure that change

Kahng Iwata

Correspondence between data sets examined.. Correspondence: Brief functional analysis versus full functional Alysis: 66% Within session versus full FA: 60% Brief AND Within versus full functional analysis: 54% If full functional analysis clear, brief functional analysis was more likely to be right BFA =s tendency towards false positive If a full functional analysis unclear, with his session more likely to identify of their function Within session equals tendency towards false negatives

Kahng and Iwata Comparison of brief FA full FA,And within session analysis

Results brief functional analysis shows reasonably good correspondence with full functional analysis Functional analysis has a tendency to ID a function True positives and false positives Brief FA I good if you’re short on time. Can add in the within session pattern and see what that indicates

Brief functional analysis versus full functional analysis: the moral of the story

Model that progresses from brief functional analysis to more extended assessments Maximizes efficiency Increases probability of identifying a function Purpose: to illustrate a model where assessment progression from brief to extended analysis to ID functions for problem behavior Subject: 20 school age kids with severe PB In summary, function was quantified? a 17/20 using this model

Progressive model of functional analysis Volumetric

Provide step-by-step directions on how you might proceed when trying to determine a function for problem behavior What’s missing? If still undifferentiated at phase 4, Use a PDA to identify potential idiosyncratic of variables that can be tested in an FA

Progressive model of functional analysis

May be used in a less controlled, natural environment. Advantage: less disruption to the clients routine. Requires fewer resources Purpose: to replicate the Sigafoos and Saggers functional analysis and compare the results to a standard functional else’s

Trial based functional assessment

If you are short on assessment time you might Use a

Brief FA

If you want to conduct the assessment in the natural environment, you might use a

Trial based functional assessment

Read functional assessment and full functional assessment show… correspondence with respect to results

Good

If you don’t get differentiated results from your standard functional assessment: -idiosyncratic variables i.e., does not tested in the standard functional analysis, maybe at work Do your descriptive assessment then design a new functional analysis to test your hypothesis Example , Kuhn

Do your descriptive assessment then design a new FA to test your hypothesis

Shows what to do if you have an unclear functional analysis due to a potential idiosyncratic function Do descriptive assessment Design test and control conditions for your hypothesis A functional analysis is more than just attention, demand, alone, and play

Kuhn modified functional analysis

Provides another example of how to progress when your functional analysis is inconclusive Sometimes reinforcers for problem behavior change over time – these can be specified via Mands A modified functional analysis using a Mand analysis may be appropriate for a verbal children who make unreasonable demands and engage in problem behavior when those Mands aren’t meant

Bowman Mand compliance: moral of the story

Alternatively,to reinforcing multiple topographies of problem behavior in a single functional analysis, you could focus on

The most disruptive topography only

Most efficient to focus on all topographie Can be problematic if different topographies are maintained by differently in for service. Example SIB is maintained by attention, but aggression is maintained by escape. Always graph each topography separately If necessary, please topographies on extinction until all topographies emerge

Which topography to reinforce

Most efficient to focus on all topography is most efficient to focus on all topographies Always graph each topography separately If necessary, please topography is on extinction until all topography of a marriage

Which topographies to reinforce? Moral of the story

A variable not tested in the standard functional analysis conditions is known as

Idiosyncratic Variable

How many topography is a problem behavior can you include any single functional analysis?

All the topographies of aggression… As many as there are in one class

If you include multiple topography is in one functional analysis what must you do?

Graph each topography separately

Assessment time is limited, e.g. outpatient clinic Brief functional analysis Multi element consisting of two rapidly changing reversal designs conducted in two phases, (test and contingency reversal, where the reinforcement contingency arrange for alternative behavior) Derby 1992 79 cases Brief functional analysis Problem behavior occurred in only 63% of cases Of these cases function identified for 77% Behavior poses significant risk and cannot be allowed to occur often Latency measures, Thompson Functional analysis of precursor behaviors, Smith

Challenges to functional analysis methodology

Assessment must be conducted a naturalist Setting Train caregivers to implement Behavior occurs at very low rates Stimulus control manipulations. E.g.Ringdahi use caregivers as therapist Extended session duration to increase establishing operations and exposure to reinforcers to increase likelihood that behavior emerges Conduct extended descriptive assessment to identify/illuminate idiosyncratic reinforcers

Summary and review constraints to functional analysis methodology

Potential benefits outweigh potential risks Protective procedures in place Controlled setting available Sufficient train staff B. A. Has procedural expertise Informed consent obtained Procedure is reviewed and approved

Conduct a functional analysis only if

Develop a plan based on the results of your descriptive assessment; implement it, and systematically evaluate it If the plan is not effective, consider doing a functional analysis before revising

If you do not conduct a functional analysis

Because it is experimental rather than correlational in nature, it is the only assessment formal, that can let us validly talk about cause-and-effect relationships Isolate relevant variables – certainly about controlling variables is greatest when systematic manipulations are employed Potential treatment effects maybe observed during assessment Systematic manipulations increase the likelihood that the use of ineffective or unnecessary procedures will be avoided

Advantages of experimental analysis

Failure to identify the full range of the controlling variables Failure to identify the specific feature of a situation that occasion the problem behavior E.g., generic – demands Specifically escape from physical prompts Potential for iatrogenic effects ( patrons means physician in Greek and genic meaning Induced by Time and labor intensive; specialized training? Contrive situations may not Simulate what occurs in the natural environment

Limitations of experimental analysis

Indirect assessment – verbal report Descriptive assessment, naturalistic observation Functional analysis – experimental manipulation

Functional assessment

Any formal method used to identify sources of reinforcement to maintain problem behavior is

Functional assessment

Prior to the advent of functional assessment Behavior modification – superimposing powerful reinforcement and punishment contingencies Focused on the topography of the response The form of the behavior is so serious, the reasons why it occurred was secondary Over reliance on punishment Get rid of the behavior by any means necessary

Historical developments

Participants, nine Dependent variables: SIB, partial interval recording ``` Protection from risk Medical exam, exclusion if High risk Criterion for rest established by a physician Session terminated if criterion met Post session exams by a nurse Weekly case review ```

Iwata How subjects were protected from risk

Implications: Importance of function over topography Evoking potentially dangerous behavior while protecting client and therapist

Iwata Resultsi

Study 1: Susceptibility to tangible reinforcement Rooker Preference assessment Functional analysis Target behavior: frequency of arbitrary response Conditions: alone attention tangible demand play Study 2: false positive functional assessment outcomes Preference assessment identify high preference edibles Descriptive assessment of consequences Harrison of tangible conditions

False positive functional assessment outcomes

Summary of susceptibility to tangible reinforcement, Rooker Study one Five out of six subjects acquired a new response when exposed to tangible reinforcement. But not when exposed to attention or escape Study 2: all three subjects: problem behavior was maintained by automatically enforcement The problem behavior occurred more when I highly preferred tangible was delivered after problem behavior Demonstrates a false positive tangible function

Moral of the story On tangibles Limit the use of tangible conditions in functional assessments If you include a tangible condition use items that are identified via a descriptive analysis No items are identified in the descriptive analysis they don’t include a tangible condition

Carr Durand Relevant response study. Assessment tool To identify situations that occasion problem behavior Seminal paper on functional communication training FCT to replace problem behavior Limitations: did not manipulate consequences so problem behavior is actually on extinction Relevant response in the difficult 100 should probably be a mand for escape

Moral of the story.

Based on the recommendation of Connors at all, when should salient SD’s be Involved in an FA

If you have reason to suspect the client is not discriminating between conditions

Experiment two Functional analysis of relevant and in relevant responses Results Disruptive behavior reduced in relevant response condition only Mands Increase in the Irrelevant response face but persist in the relevant face

Carr Durand 1985: Results

Examine separate and combined effects of antecedent, establishing operation present versus absent and consequent events, contingent enforcement versus no reinforcement ABC, FA Iwata versus AB FA Carr Six individuals with developmental disabilities and SIB maintain attention is this

Worsdell, et al

All six subjects needed the contingency to consistently engage in problem behavior AB , FA does not include any contingencies for problem behavior If you use that methodology you may not see enough problem behavior to determine an effective treatment. Best to stick with the ABC Iwata FA

Worsdell Moral of the story

10 and 15 minute FA’s had perfect correspondence Five and 15 minute functional analysis Had three disagreements: two data sets: 15 minutes clear. Five minutes unclear. When does that: 15 minutes was unclear. Five minutes automatic reinforcement

Wallace Study of duration results

10 minute functional analysis sufficient. Most conservative approach Five minute functional analysis mostly good Five minute functional analysis might be a problem if Your client doesn’t discriminate well Extinction needs to occur in the play/ alone Establishing operation needs a wild to come into affect

Session durations: the moral of the story, Wallace

Correspondence between trial based functional analysis and standard functional Analysis for 6/10 Partial correspondence for one subject Lack of correspondence for 3/10 subjects Good for when you don’t have resources for a stand and functional assessment or when you are unable to remove the client from ongoing activities Not necessarily faster than a standard functional analysis. Nice disruptive to classroom routines. Requires fewer step and less resources

Trial based functional analysis | Summary, Bloom

To identify a potentially Effective intervention Demonstrated that you could teach someone to ask for the reinforcer that maintains problem behavior and this would decrease problem behavior

Notthup contingency reversal: brief functional analysis

One condition rent at a time. Less, because of amount of time required

Reversal

Fairly common, more efficient than reversal. One task condition alternated with control. May assist in discriminability of conditions

Pairwise

Enhancing discrimination. Use 10 minute functional analysis to increase exposure to the contingencies. Use salient discriminative stimuli. Use a different experimental design if needed Enhance motivating operations Alter response measurement Vary the control condition

Clarifying functional analysis outcomes

May Facilitate differential responding reducing the Duration of standard functional analysis May improve accuracy of brief functional analysis Purpose: to determine if programmed of these, facilitated differential responding in a standard functional analysis

SDs Connors, programming discriminative stimuli, clarifying functional analysis outcomes

Can’t predict in advance which subject will need as. Some subjects are more or less sensitive to functional analysis contingencies. Those who are less sensitive will need sd Those who are less sensitive will need ST Recommendation: include STD. May produce faster differentiation Maybe necessary for differentiation in some cases Easy to do Using ST, different therapist, different rooms, different colored shirts

Honduras, programming SD

Typical experiment of design: multi element. Two additional experimental designs that could be used to enhance discrimination in functional analysis:

Reversal, pairwise Clarifying functional analysis outcomes are you in now thanks Ry did you get her medicine now can you please buy dinner but I mean you know I don’t know what time they close on

Enhance motivational operations Example alone condition establishes the EO for attention Programmed Pre-session deprivation After response measurement, evaluate and place consequences on only one topography rather than multiple, at a time Minimize his chances of undifferentiated results due to multiple control Very the control condition. Manner in which attention is delivered, FT 30 versus continuous Types of leisure items available. Highly preferred toys during attention condition may compete with attention reinforcer. Alone as control for negative reinforcement. KAHNG. Because SD, i.e. person with history of delivering demands, and EO, instructions, and a contingency or absent

Clarifying functional analysis outcomes

You can shorten the functional analysis for use in outpatient settings by conducting a brief functional analysis with only one session per condition Contingency reversal: demonstrated that you could teach someone to ask for the reinforcer that maintains problem behavior and this would decrease problem behavior

Northrop Brief functional analysis

To identify a potentially effective intervention Condition with highest level of problem behavior in functional analysis A = reinforcement for problem behavior; extinction for Mands B= reinforcement for MANDS, extinction for problem behavior Conducted as a B A B

Contingency reversal

Brief functional analysis shows reasonably good correspondence with all functional analysis Brief F analysis has a tendency to identify a function. True positives and false positives BFA tendency towards false positive Use within session to clarify

Kahng Iwata Testing brief functional analysis against full functional

Model that progresses from brief functional analysis to more extended assessments Maximizes efficiency Increases probability of identifying a function.

Progressive model of functional analysis Volumetric

Purpose: to illustrate a model or assessment progresses from free to extend an analysis to identify functions of problem behavior

VOLLMER, progressing from brief to extended functional analysis

Provides step-by-step directions on how you might proceed when trying to determine a function for problem behavior It’s still on differentiated at phase 4,, If Idiosyncratic variables At work, Use a descriptive analysis to identify potential idiosyncratic variables that can be tested in a functional analysis

Progressive model of functional analysis Vollmer

The trials were control, test, control. Each segment was two minutes. 20 Trials of each condition

Trial based functional analysis Bloom

Variables not tested in the standard functional analysis

Idiosyncratic variables

Do a descriptive assessment Design test and control conditions for your hypothesis-A modified functional analysis A functional analysis is more than just attention, demand, alone come and play

What to do if you have an unclear functional analysis due to a potential idiosyncratic function. Functional analysis differentiated. Kuhn

KUHN, treatment evaluation straightening, modified functional analysis is an example of

Testing for idiosyncratic variables

Descriptive assessment suggest problem behavior likely when straightening was interrupted Taught the phrase, is this trash? Problem behavior was put on extinction A functional analysis is more than just attention, demand come along and play

Kuhn | Treatment of valuation. Idiosyncratic variables

Descriptive assessments Indicated districtive behavior occurred when mands were not honored Modified functional analysis completed Multi element design. Provides another example of how to progress when your functional analysis is inconclusive. Sometimes reinforcers for problem behavior change over time – These can be specified via Mands A modified functional analysis using a man and analysis may be most appropriate for a verbal children who make unreasonable demands and engage in problem behavior when those Mands aren’t met

Bowman Mand Compliance | And example of idiosyncratic function for a problem behavior

You could focus on the most disruptive topography only as a post to multiple topographies of problem behavior in a single functional analysis Most efficient to focus on all topographies. Can be problematic if different topographies are maintained by different reinforcers. Example SIB is maintained by attention but aggression is maintained by escape. Always graph each topography separately If necessary, place topography is on extension until all topographies emerge

Which topography to reinforce

Multielement consisting of two rapidly changing reversal design conducted in two phases (test and contingency reversal we are reinforcement contingency arranged for alternative behavior)

Brief functional analysis

Implement latency measures and functional analysis of precursor behaviors when

Behavior poses significant risk and cannot be allowed to occur often. Challenges to functional assessment me

Use stimulus control manipulation’s such as using caregivers as therapist, extended session duration to increase establishing operations and exposure to reinforcers to increase likelihood that behavior emerges. Conduct extended descriptive assessment to identify/illuminate idiosyncratically reinforcers when....

Behavior occurs at very low rates… Constraints to functional assessment methodology

Failure to identify the full range of the controlling variables Failure to identify the specific features of a situation that occasion the problem behavior EG., Generic – demands. Specifically escape from physical prompts Potential for your iatrogenic affects Time and labor intensive: specialized training? Contrived situations may not simulate what occurs in the natural environment

Limitations of experimental analysis

Purpose, to conduct a brief functional analysis of aggression plus a contingency reversal, replacement or/DR a. Within a 90 minute outpatient appointment Dependent variables: aggression, appropriate behaviors, MANDS, all six second partial interval

Northrup Brief functional analysis

Requires fewer staff and less resources to implement

Trial based functional analysis

Correspondence between this and standard functional analysis for a six out of 10 – Partial correspondence for one subject Lack of correspondence for three out of 10 subjects Good for when you don’t have resources for a standard functional analysis or when you were unable to remove the client from ongoing activities Not necessarily faster than a standard functional analysis Less disruptive to classroom routines Requires fewer staff and less resources

Trial based functional analysis, bloom

Purpose: to conduct a brief FA of aggression plus a continreversal, replacement R /DRA . Within 90 minute outpatien appointment Use contingency reversal: Conducted as a BAB

Brief functional analysis Northrop