Comparisons of functional behavior assessment procedures to the functional analysis of problem behavior.

Abstract

Functional behavior assessment (FBA) is a mandated and evidence-based practice when student's problem behavior interferes with their learning. The type of FBA conducted can differ widely between schools, which leads to questions about the validity of the conclusions reached. The current study conducted indirect (i.e., Antecedent-Behavior-Consequence [ABC] Interview, Functional Analysis Screening Tool, Questions About Behavioral Function), descriptive (i.e., ABC Narrative), and experimental functional assessment methods (i.e., EFA; functional analysis of problem behavior) with 14 children engaging in socially reinforced problem behavior. We compared exact and partial convergence between these FBA procedures alone and in combination with each other to the EFA. Results showed FBA procedures exactly identified the function of problem behavior identified via EFA less than 25% of the time. In contrast, higher convergence between these FBA methods and the EFA occurred when evaluating partial convergence. That is, these FBA procedures correctly identified at least one of the functions of problem behavior identified by the EFA at least 70% of the time. We discuss these data in terms of their utility to inform practice and implications for treatment.

A comparative effectiveness trial of functional behavioral assessment methods

“…As a result, it is inappropriate to speculate on how less rigorous FBA methods may fare in similar comparisons. However, the modest correspondence between the results of these two FBA formats is consistent with findings from previous comparisons, including those that compared other forms of indirect and descriptive assessments with functional analyses (Alter et al, 2008; Contreras et al, 2023; Hall, 2005; Pence et al, 2009; Romani et al, 2023; Virues‐Ortega et al, 2011). The treatment findings did not appear to be affected by this modest degree of correspondence.…”

“…Comparisons of results from different FBA methods have produced inconsistent findings regarding correspondence. Although a few studies have found that results from indirect and descriptive assessments correspond with those from functional analyses (e.g., Arndorfer et al, 1994;Borrero et al, 2016;Newcomer & Lewis, 2004;Wasano et al, 2009), others have reported more equivocal findings or even a complete lack of correspondence (e.g., Alter et al, 2008;Contreras et al, 2023;Hall, 2005;Martens et al, 2019;Pence et al, 2009;Romani et al, 2023;Virues-Ortega et al, 2011). In addition, most studies evaluating the correspondence between the results of functional analyses and other forms of FBAs have included only a few participants (e.g., Arndorfer et al, 1994;Cunningham & O'Neill, 2000;Hall, 2005;Martens et al, 2019;Newcomer & Lewis, 2004;Pence et al, 2009).…”

Increasing Caregiver Reliability on Anecdotal Assessments

“…Motivating operations for socially negative consequences are also avoided in the control regardless of if the behavior is emitted or not. Although there is wide support for the use of the FA (e.g., Romani, Luehring, Hays, & Boorse, 2023), there are issues surrounding its use in applied settings. First, during FAs, the emission of problem behavior contacts programmed contingencies, and this continues until one identifies the maintaining variable(s).…”