Internal Consistency and Inter-Rater Reliability of the Questions About Behavioral Function (QABF) Rating Scale When Used by Teachers and Paraprofessionals

May, Michael; Sheng, Yunlong; Chitiyo, Morgan; Brandt, Rachel C.; Howe, Abigail P.

doi:10.1353/etc.2014.0013

Cited by 9 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, similar to A third issue in the analysis of reliability of anecdotal assessments is the specific reliability calculations used. Researchers most commonly measure reliability using a correlational analysis across participants (Duker, & Sigafoo, 1998;May, Sheng, Chitiyo, Brandt, & Howe, 2014;Shogren & Rojahn, 2003;Zarcone et al 1990) like the measures used by Durrand and Crimmins (1988) . This presents a problem as it does not give readers the extent to which each pair of respondents agreed (Iwata DeLeon, & Roscoe, 2013), which is the level at which anecdotal assessments are useful for clinical application.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Increasing Caregiver Reliability on Anecdotal Assessments

Drummond

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Functional analyses are the gold standard of confirming maintaining variables of problem behavior. Despite widespread support, many clinical settings instead use anecdotal assessments. These have been shown to have poor reliability when used by non-experts but can be useful for confirming maintaining variables of problem behavior when agreement has reached a certain level. We used behavior skills training to teach new staff member pairs behavior function to increase their reliability on these assessments. We found that although agreement increased slightly, this was not clinically significant. Out of the two pairs of participants one pair of participants was able to identify their client's maintaining variable of problem behavior. Future research should investigate the type of training used for non-experts for example training non-experts to state problem behavior in objective operational terms.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%