Biobehavior Analysis of Self-Injurious Behavior in a Person with Profound Handicaps

Abstract

Two studies investigated self-injurious behavior (SIB) in a man with profound handicaps. Study 1 examined the effects of contextual variables on the rate of SIB during differing environmental conditions and behavioral states such as drowsy, quiet alert, active alert, agitated/crying. Results indicated that the rate of SIB varied depending on contextual conditions and behavioral state. The results also suggested that the function of SIB changed depending on the behavior state of the individual. Study 2 examined the effects of a treatment program that involved manipulating the environment depending on behavioral states, and then adding medication to the treatment plan. Results indicated that the treatment plan was effective in reducing self-injurious behavior and that the percentage of time spent in alert states increased when the treatment plan was implemented. Both SIB and behavioral state were positively affected when Fluphenazine was added to the treatment plan.

Functional Analysis of Problem Behavior: A Review

“…Data from published studies indicate that most functional analysis sessions are 10 min (52.0%), 15 min (28.2%), or 5 min (11.1%) in duration. However, a few studies have programmed sessions as brief as 1 min (Sigafoos & Meikle, 1996;Sigafoos & Saggers, 1995) or as long as 30 min (e.g., Arndorfer, Miltenberger, Woster, Rortvedt, & Gaffaney, 1994;Reese, 1997).…”

“…Minimizing the number of response topographies in the contingency class (e.g., Thompson et al, 1998) or graphing response topographies separately (Derby et al, 1994(Derby et al, , 2000 may also yield clear assessment outcomes. When functional analyses based on brief session duration (5 to 15 min) yield undifferentiated results, observing the effects of contingencies over longer periods (hours, days, or weeks) may allow relevant EOs to operate for a sufficient amount of time to evoke problem behavior and yield clear assessment results (e.g., Arndorfer et al, 1994;Reese, 1997). Finally, arranging contingencies to follow reported precursors to the target responses or even arbitrary responses (see , Grace, Thompson, & Fisher, 1996 may demonstrate behavioral sensitivity to particular forms of reinforcement that can then be incorporated into treatments for problem behavior (this strategy may be an improvement over arbitrarily selecting an intervention, but it does not determine the actual function of problem behavior).…”

Catch the wave! Time‐window sequential analysis of alertness stimulation in individuals with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities

“…DSPs are not sure whether ‘being alert’ is a strict precondition for providing stimulation. Starting an activity when the individual with PIMD is withdrawn may also be a possibility in order to make that individual alert (Guess & Siegel‐Causey ; Reese ). Moreover, alert periods of individuals with PIMD last only for a short time (Mudford et al .…”

Educational approaches for maximizing arousal in children with multiple and severe disability: New directions for research and practice in early childhood contexts

“…Indeed, the Project ABLE paper [7], discussed above, appears to be the only published behaviour state intervention study involving school-aged participants with MSD. Reese [12] reported the use of behaviour state assessment in an intervention involving one adult with profound intellectual disability. In contrast, quite a lot of attention has been paid to the communicative and contextual involvement of students with MSD, especially in relation to partner responsivity [13].…”