Reducing Ambiguity in the Functional Assessment of Problem Behavior. (16th November 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Rooker, Griffin W.; DeLeon, Iser G.; Borrero, Carrie S. W.; Frank‐Crawford, Michelle A.; Roscoe, Eileen M.
• Is Part Of: Behavioral interventions. Volume 30:Number 1(2015:Feb.)
• Page Start: 1
• Page End: 35
• Publication Date: 2014-11-16
• Subjects: People with mental disabilities -- Behavior modification -- Periodicals; Behavior therapy -- Periodicals; 616.89142
• DOI: 10.1002/bin.1400
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1072-0847

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <p>Severe problem behavior (e.g., self‐injury and aggression) remains among the most serious challenges for the habilitation of persons with intellectual disabilities and is a significant obstacle to community integration. The current standard of behavior analytic treatment for problem behavior in this population consists of a functional assessment and treatment model. Within that model, the first step is to assess the behavior–environment relations that give rise to and maintain problem behavior, a functional behavioral assessment. Conventional methods of assessing behavioral function include indirect, descriptive, and experimental assessments of problem behavior. Clinical investigators have produced a rich literature demonstrating the relative effectiveness for each method, but in clinical practice, each can produce ambiguous or difficult‐to‐interpret outcomes that may impede treatment development. This paper outlines potential sources of variability in assessment outcomes and then reviews the evidence on strategies for avoiding ambiguous outcomes and/or clarifying initially ambiguous results. The end result for each assessment method is a set of best practice guidelines, given the available evidence, for conducting the initial assessment. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</p> </abstract>