In their review of synthesis within the functional analysis (FA) literature, Slaton and Hanley (2018) reported that most synthesized contingency analyses have included multiple topographies of problem behavior in the reinforcement contingency class. This leaves the question of whether one, some, or all forms of problem behavior are sensitive to the synthesized reinforcement contingencies in published analyses. To address this ambiguity, all topographies of problem behavior that were reported by caregivers to co-occur with the most concerning problem behavior were analyzed for 10 participants. We implemented extinction across one or more forms of problem behavior to determine whether all forms reported to co-occur were sensitive to the same synthesized reinforcement contingency. For nine of 10 participants, the most concerning topographies were sensitive to the same synthesized reinforcement contingencies as the less concerning topographies (results were inconclusive for one). Implications for inferring response class membership from single analyses are discussed.

No abstract

Despite a growing acknowledgement of the importance of understanding the impacts of trauma on therapeutic approaches across human service disciplines, discussions of trauma have been relatively infrequent in the behavior analytic literature. In this paper, we delineate some of the barriers to discussing and investigating trauma in applied behavior analysis (ABA) and describe how the core commitments of trauma‐informed care could be applied to behavior analysis. We then provide some examples of how trauma‐informed care might be incorporated into ABA practice. We conclude by suggesting opportunities to approach trauma as a viable avenue for behavior analytic research and argue that omitting trauma‐informed care from ABA could be detrimental not only to the public perception of ABA, but to the effectiveness of our assessment and treatment procedures.

Programs that prevent the development of severe problem behavior in young children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are critically needed. We describe a program designed to do this, and we report on a preliminary evaluation of its effects with four 3and 4-year-old children with ASD. Parents served as the primary implementers, with twice-weekly coaching from a Board Certified Behavior Analyst. Direct measures and Aberrant Behavior Checklist scores reflected decreases in emerging problem behavior. Direct measures also reflected increases in child communication, social, and cooperation skills, and parents rated the process as highly acceptable. A randomized controlled trial will be required to evaluate the extent to which the program prevents the development of problem behavior in young children with ASD.