Unit 9- 2 Flashcards
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
Any formal method used to identify sources of reinforcement that maintain problem behaviors
Functional assessment
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
When conducting a bit… You do not manipulate the environment in anyway. You simply observe events as they naturally occur
Descriptive assessment
Functional analysis is a type of
Functional assessment
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
Process of identifying independent variables that are functionally related to behavior. Can take many many forms
Functional analys I
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
The purpose of a functional analysis is to
Identify the maintaining variable for a behavior
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
Lovaas
Carr
Berkson
Early functional analysis studies; controlled by a single contingency,
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
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
Direct observation
Measurement of behavior under test controlled conditions
Basic features of functional analysis
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Attention
Demand
Alone
Play
Sometimes tangibles
Functional analysis protocol/conditions
What is the relevant establishing operation in the demand condition
The presence of the demands
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
- Limited Assessment time: solution: brief functional assessment. Test a single function.
- Potentially dangerous behavior
Solution: precursor assessment and latency functional assessment - 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
