BST 1030 - Class 4.1 - Tuesday January 28, 2025 PDF

BST 1030: WEEK 4, CLASS 1 Tuesday, January 28th, 2025 Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. AGENDA FOR TODAY 3.2 content review Indirect assessment tools Direct assessment tools Functional analysis methods...

BST 1030: WEEK 4, CLASS 1 Tuesday, January 28th, 2025 Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. AGENDA FOR TODAY 3.2 content review Indirect assessment tools Direct assessment tools Functional analysis methods Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. CLASS 3.2 REVIEW Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. PROCESSES WHEN ASSESSING FOR REDUCTION Indirect Direct Functional Assessment Assessment Analysis Most intrusive Least intrusive and accurate and accurate Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. INDIRECT ASSESSMENT TOOLS FAI – QABF – FAST - MAS Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT INTERVIEW (FAI) Open-ended interview form that can be used to gather information across a wide range of topics. Advantages Helpful in determining the next steps of assessment. Easy to use and limited training required. Open-ended format allows interviewer to ask follow-up questions. Disadvantages Due to flexibility, some experience is required to become effective. Limited training can also lead to less “rich” information. Anecdotal information lacks objectivity and may include bias. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. COMPLETED FAI EXAMPLE (O’NEILL ET AL., 2015) Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. HYPOTHESIZING FUNCTION FROM THE FAI Once this interview (or a similar one that provides similar information), we can start to develop a hypothesis about what is maintaining the interfering behaviour(s). It’s helpful to understand the typical operant learning contingency that is characteristic of each function of behaviour. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  Attention not TYPICAL OPERANT A available LEARNING Behaviour CONTINGENCIES BY B occurs FUNCTION: ATTENTION Attention provided C Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  Tangible not TYPICAL OPERANT A available LEARNING Behaviour CONTINGENCIES BY B occurs FUNCTION: ACCESS Tangible provided C Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  Aversive stimulus presented TYPICAL OPERANT A LEARNING CONTINGENCIES BY B Behaviour occurs FUNCTION: ESCAPE/AVOID Aversive stimulus removed C Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  Undifferentiated TYPICAL OPERANT A LEARNING CONTINGENCIES BY B Behaviour occurs FUNCTION: AUTOMATIC No clear external consequence / change C in environment Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  Rating scales are designed to help further identify antecedents and consequences of problem behaviours. RATING While interviews typically have open-ended questions, rating scales have specific questions or statements that the SCALES informant answers using the chosen scale method (yes/no, rating a Likert scale). It’s often advised to administer these questionnaires to more than one person – why? Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  A 16-item questionnaire; each item relates to MOTIVATION potential motivations (function) for the behaviour. ASSESSMENT Each item is rated by the informant on a 7-point Likert scale (each item rated from never to always). SCALE (MAS) The MAS yields 4 sub-scales: attention, escape, tangible, sensory (four possible functions). Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  SCORING THE MAS (EXAMPLE FROM CASE STUDY FOR ASSIGNMENT) Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  Uses forced choice (yes/no) rather than Likert scale FUNCTIONAL (rating between numbers to designate a qualitative label). ASSESSMENT Yes/no is sometimes hard for people who want to SCREENING answer “sometimes”. TOOL (FAST) 27 items; speaks to five different functions (attention, activity, escape, sensory stimulation, pain attenuation). Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  SCORING THE FAST (EXAMPLE FROM CASE STUDY FOR ASSIGNMENT) Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  QUESTIONS 25-item inventory, scored on a 3-point Likert ABOUT scale (0-3, never to often). BEHAVIOURAL Measures across five functions: attention, escape, non-social, physical, and tangible. FUNCTION (QABF) Very similar layout to the MAS. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  SCORING THE QABF (EXAMPLE FROM CASE STUDY FOR ASSIGNMENT) Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  Bar graphs are used to graphically display the results by score. The highest bars indicate the function that was scored as most likely from GRAPHING INDIRECT those tests. TOOL RESULTS Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  Two bars can be used to directly compare results between different respondents; multiple behaviours can also be displayed GRAPHING INDIRECT on one graph. TOOL RESULTS Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  DIRECT / DESCRIPTIVE ASSESSMENT Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. MOVING ALONG, ADDING INFORMATION… Collect information from FAI and Observe client and collect ABC rating scale tool data on contingencies (indirect assessment) (direct assessment) Use this information to schedule Use this information to clarify direct observation periods hypotheses from indirect Use this information together to Use this information together to determine possible function determine possible function Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. GENERAL PROCESS FOR DIRECT ASSESSMENT Use information from indirect assessment to inform conditions for observation. Observe learner under “typical” conditions; make no attempts to change the environment. Observer ensures that materials are ready and accessible for data collection and that they remain as unobtrusive as possible. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  ABC DATA COLLECTION A-B-C (i.e., antecedent-behavior-consequence) assessment or A-B-C recording is used to uncover the antecedent and consequent events that frequently occur before and after the interfering behavior. ABC data can be collected using a narrative approach or a structured approach. Standard practice: collect on numerous (15-20) instances of the behaviour and sum the total count of specific antecedents / consequences that are consistent with the behaviour. Collect data across as many settings, times of day, and people as possible (2-5 days). Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  ABC DATA: NARRATIVE/ANECDOTAL Written descriptions of environmental events (antecedents and consequences) are recorded when the problem behaviour occurs. Advantages Disadvantages You are free to record Those unfamiliar with ABA anything that happens. might record things like “frustrated” (not an event). Allows descriptive details of Can be time consuming (you each individual event. might miss something). Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. ABC DATA: NARRATIVE/ANECDOTAL Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. ABC DATA: NARRATIVE/ANECDOTAL Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  ABC DATA: STRUCTURED Specific options are listed for “expected” antecedents, behaviours, and consequences; observer checks off what happens before/after each occurrence of the target behaviour. Advantages Disadvantages Saves time / more efficient. Might need to add in conditions based on your observation. Can get produce less subjective information than Untrained observers may not narrative recording. record data correctly. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. ABC DATA: STRUCTURED Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  SCATTERPLOTS Graphic inspection technique; records response frequencies under day/time when the behaviour happened (x-axis = days of the week, y-axis = times of day). Sometimes, the environmental variables that maintain the interfering behaviour are not clear from other assessment tools. Scatterplots can give a quick visual inspection of times of day or days when the behaviour is likely to occur. Often used as an ‘additional’ piece of assessment rather than a common part of a functional behaviour assessment. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. SCATTERPLOT EXAMPLE Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. PRACTICE ACTIVITY Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. ABC DATA: USING THE FAO Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  Information to fill in before observation: USING THE Who is being observed and who is collecting FUNCTIONAL data Dates of collection ASSESSMENT Target behaviour Specific antecedents/consequences, etc. OBSERVATION Time intervals for each row FORM Rows on the FAO = specific intervals / activities. This is up to you but may be helpful to choose discrete periods (e.g., if observing at school, a class schedule). Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  The first time a behaviour occurs, use the number 1 to indicate 1 occurrence of the behaviour. This number goes in three places: USING THE Under the appropriate behaviour column Under the appropriate predictor (antecedent) column FUNCTIONAL Under the appropriate perceived function (consequence) column ASSESSMENT Repeat with 2 for the second occurrence, 3 for the third occurrence, and so on. Use time intervals (“time” row) to determine when to move to next row. Slash number along OBSERVATION bottom once it has been used. FORM On this data sheet, the numbers are not representing a count (number of times), but the order in which occurrences were observed (the first time, the second time, etc.). We can still get total count information from counting the occurrences recorded. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  FAO EXAMPLE Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. INTERPRETING FBA DATA Typical practice is to complete an indirect interview, have several respondents complete an indirect rating scale, to then collect ABC and/or scatterplot data by direct observation. Comparing the possible function between all sources of information provides further evidence for the likely function(s) of the interfering behaviour. What happens if all sources provide slightly different hints towards different maintaining variables? Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. INTERPRETING FBA DATA Antecedents are predictive, but consequences are what is going to tell us the most information! Highest frequency antecedents / consequences may be related to the behaviour – but we sometimes can’t develop a strong hypothesis based on a single observational session, or a correlational relationship. This is where functional analysis comes into play. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  Indirect Assessment Procedures (initial intake, reviewing previous documentation, THE FBA PROCESS, interviews, rating scales, checklists, questionnaires) CONTINUED! Direct Assessment Procedures (collecting ABC data, collecting baseline data) Testing your Hypothesis (functional analysis) Summarizing Assessment Results (summary statements, behavioural objectives) Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS Brian Iwata (1994): described the method of functional analysis & published an article summarizing 152 single-subject functional analyses for SIB. Demonstrated the functional analysis procedure as highly effective in determining the function of interfering behaviour(s), revolutionizing the way these behaviours were assessed in ABA. The way functional analyses are run nowadays are very different, in that they are quicker, safer, and more nuanced to led to better function-matching for interventions. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS While an FA is the most precise way we can determine function, this procedure can only be run by those qualified to do so. Safety plans, gathering consent, and gathering all FBA information first is essential. The initial assessment pieces provide initial information on possible function that produces a hypothesis to test in the functional analysis. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  The traditional FA format tests five separate conditions; all five conditions are meant to control for all functions or to test certain functions of behaviour. TRADITIONAL Attention Demand Tangible FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS Alone Control Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  TRADITIONAL FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS CONDITIONS (Reinforcing) FA Condition Function Tested Antecedent Consequence Someone else present, but Attention provided contingent on Attention Attention no attention given. target behaviour. Demand is removed contingent on Demand Escape A demand is delivered. target behaviour. A preferred tangible item Tangible item / activity is Tangible Tangible is in sight, but not provided contingent on target accessible. behaviour. The person is alone in a Alone Automatic Behaviour is noted if it occurs. room. Attention & tangibles are None – meant as control given provided non- Control N/A for others contingently and no demands are placed. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. TRADITIONAL FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS GRAPHS Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  Research began to investigate how functional analyses could be done in a shorter time frame, with more precise results, in a safer context: VARIATIONS Brief: short but sweet ON THE Trial-based: matched controls, short trials, and natural settings TRADITIONAL Latency-based: how quickly is the behaviour FUNCTIONAL evoked? Precursor: can we get the same results if we ANALYSIS evoke precursors to the behaviour? Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  Basic procedure for the synthesized FA: INTERVIEW- Interview informed: ~30-minute open-ended interview conducted with caregiver INFORMED https://practicalfunctionalassessment.files.wordpress.com/ SYNTHESIZED 2015/06/open-ended-functional-assessment- interview.pdf CONTINGENCY Brief observation: confirm information ANALYSIS (IISCA) garnered from interview. Contingency analysis: one single control and HANLEY ET AL. test condition, alternated quickly (~30 (2014) seconds), for fast results in a short amount of time. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  COMPARING THE FBA AND THE PFA APPROACH (TORO, 2023) Functional Behaviour Assessment (FBA) Practical Functional Assessment (PFA) In addition to interviews and direct observation, FBAs Similarities at the assessment level; both systems use may use rating scales, specific data collection tools interviews and direct observation as starting tools. (ABC, scatterplots, etc.), standardized questionnaires Interviews using PFA are open-ended and allow for such as the FAST or the QABF. more fluid conversation pre-analysis. Main difference lies within the functional analysis and Main difference within the Functional Analysis and intervention development components. intervention development components. Often quite lengthy and requires significant FA is designed to be short and light on resources amount of resources 2 conditions only: EO (establishing operation) and Multiple conditions (at least 5) HRE (happy, relaxed, engaged) Focus on examining each contingency in isolation Focus on synthesized reinforcement contingencies Requires further evaluation prior to intervention Immediately moves into the intervention Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  Why a synthesized test condition? We now understand that behaviour rarely INTERVIEW- functions to access ONE single class of reinforcer at any given time. INFORMED Reinforcement is more idiosyncratic than just SYNTHESIZED “escape”, “attention”, etc. – in other words, isolation of one single function might not give us CONTINGENCY all the information we need to know to move into effective intervention. ANALYSIS (IISCA) Greg Hanley discusses how you can move from assessment to treatment extremely efficiently using a synthesized contingency analysis: HANLEY ET AL. (2014) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rB65QnVkKjw &t=1747s Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  The synthesized contingency analysis is rapidly becoming a new standard in the field. If you’re interested, this is a great INTERVIEW- resource with lots of blog posts, podcast INFORMED episodes, literature, and resources about this approach: SYNTHESIZED https://practicalfunctionalassessment.com/ CONTINGENCY ANALYSIS (IISCA) This is also a podcast that compares the traditional functional analysis vs. the practical functional assessment: HANLEY ET AL. https://collective.dobettermovement.us/the (2014) -great-debate-practical-functional- assessment-vs-traditional-fa/ Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  BRINGING IT ALL TOGETHER: SUMMARY STATEMENTS AND BEHAVIOURAL OBJECTIVES Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  An exercise that involves pulling information from FBA data to develop a statement about WHAT IS A the likely variables maintaining the target behaviour. SUMMARY STATEMENT? If you complete a summary statement for all assessment tools that have been used, you can then compare them to see whether the same function is indicated throughout. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  (O’Neill et al., 2015) SUMMARY STATEMENT FRAMEWORK Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  SUMMARY STATEMENT EXAMPLES Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  WHAT IS A Behavioural objectives are goals that a clinician sets for a learner that reflect: BEHAVIOURAL The target behaviour - objective, measurable, observable. OBJECTIVE The context for the behaviour change - where should the (FOR change occur? REDUCTION)? The measurable criteria for change (achievable yet challenging) – how is “success” of an intervention measured? Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  SETTING Determine the end goal for the behaviour. MEASURABLE In some cases, it might be that at the end of intervention, the behaviour shouldn’t be happening at CRITERIA FOR all (e.g., severe SIB). CHANGE (FOR In other cases, it might be not necessarily be zero (i.e., calling out in class: realistically, it may still occur from REDUCTION) time to time, and that’s okay!) Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  BEHAVIOURAL When asked to complete a task in the classroom, Asher will complete the task, ask for OBJECTIVES FOR a break, or request assistance 100% of the time, based on opportunities provided by the REDUCTION teacher. Asher’s throwing objects behaviour in response to a task demand will reduce to 0 TARGETS occurrences per 1-hour class. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  Spitting will occur in 0% of intervals within BEHAVIOURAL a 2-hour session. OBJECTIVES FOR REDUCTION Crying will occur for 1 minute or less, TARGETS within a 30-minute observation period, at home. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW Describe the purpose of rating scales in functional behaviour assessment. Identify the names of commonly used rating scales & how to use them. Describe the purpose behind ABC data collection. Demonstrate how to collect narrative vs. structured ABC data. Explain what the general process of a functional analysis is. Identify several variations from the traditional functional analysis. Describe the process of completing a synthesized contingency analysis. Write a summary statement and a behavioural objective based on functional behaviour assessment and baseline data. Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission. FOR THURSDAY Working class for behaviour reduction assignment (we have introduced the assignment in these past two lectures). We will review things in detail, but this will largely be a class for you to be working and asking questions. The next two lectures are scheduled to give you time during class to work. It is up to you whether you want to work in class or elsewhere on campus, but we will answer questions and provide feedback on drafts during this time. Feedback will not be provided via email. You are being given the time, so please use it wisely! Developed by Marina Jiujias. Cannot be shared or reproduced without permission.  REFERENCES Hanley, G. P., Jin, S., Vanselow, N. R., & Hanratty, L. A. (2014). Producing meaningful improvements in problem behavior of children with autism via synthesized analyses and treatments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 47(1), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.106 Iwata, B. A., Dorsey, D. F., Slifer, K. J., Bauman, K. E., & Richman, G. S. (1994). Toward a functional analysis of self-injury. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(2), 197-209. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1994.27-197 Matson, J. L. (2021). Functional assessment for challenging behaviors and mental health disorders (2nd ed.). Springer.  REFERENCES O’Neill, R. E., Albin, R. W., Storey, K., Horner, R. H. & Sprague, J. R. (2015). Functional assessment and program development for problem behavior: A practical handbook (3rd ed.). CENGAGE Learning. Toro, L. (2023). PFA & SBT: Towards compassionately navigating the assessment and treatment of dangerous interfering behaviour [PowerPoint slides]. Turner, K. (2017). Functional behavior assessment: Case studies and practice. Cognella.