Association for Behavior Analysis International

Trial-based functional analyses (FA) are highly pragmatic assessments because programmed trials are brief and experimental control can be established following minimal problem behavior. Given these advantages, trial-based FAs appear to be particularly well suited for teachers confronted with persistent challenging behavior in schools. Notwithstanding, relatively few studies have highlighted practical applications of trial-based FAs and little is known about how best to use this technology to generate optimal outcomes in applied settings. The first presenter will highlight a streamlined approach to data analysis that allows a single practitioner to serve as both therapist and data collector while using latency-based FA data as baseline for a systematic and comprehensive treatment validation process. The second presenter will highlight data extending this intervention model to a two-component compound-schedules trial-based FA conducted in a public classroom with other children present. The third presenter will discuss recent advances in synthesized contingency analyses, will highlight advantages of these analyses in school settings, and will present data demonstrating how these analyses might be conducted within a trial-based framework. The final presenter will highlight ways to triangulate the results of indirect, descriptive, and experimental analyses (including trial-based FAs) during the functional behavior assessment process in school settings.

Trial-based functional analysis (FA) procedures are a promising alternative to standard FA procedures when concerns about safety and/or sustained control over environmental variables are raised. However, research on teacher implemented trial-based FAs is limited and it is unclear how to use trial-based FA results as baseline for subsequent treatment evaluations; especially when challenging behavior is multiply controlled. The purpose of the current study was to train a public school teacher to conduct a trial-based FA while tracking latency to first response during each segment of each trial. During intervention, we used latencies to desired, and challenging, behavior from the onset of relevant establishing operations (EO; collected during the trial-based FA) as baseline for subsequent treatment validation procedures in which we systematically synthesized treatment components for each verified function into a single intervention. The teacher conducted 30 trial-based FA trials (10 trials per condition) with fidelity, and intervention was effective at reducing problem behavior and increasing replacement behaviors for our participant. Additionally, teacher report suggested that the results and procedures were socially valid.

Recent research has begun to explore variations in functional analysis methodologies including the use of trial-based models and more recently the use of synthesized contingencies in functional analysis of challenging behavior. In a synthesized contingency, multiple putative reinforcers are delivered simultaneously contingent upon challenging behavior. This is in contrast to more traditional functional analysis methodologies in which the each putative reinforce is delivered individually. Thus far, this research has produced mixed results regarding the validity of synthesized functional analyses with synthesized contingencies. The purpose of this study was to develop and evaluate an efficient and sensitive functional analysis model which capitalizes on a trial-based format with both synthesized and individual contingency analyses. Functional analysis procedures and results for participants diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. The validity of the functional analysis results were assessed in a match-to-treatment fashion. Implications for future research and practice are presented.

Trial based functional analysis (TBFA) is a variation of functional analysis methods where brief trials across control and test conditions are interspersed within naturally occurring routines. This experimental analysis is particularly well suited for identifying the function of problem behavior in general education classrooms, and it can be implemented by teachers following minimal training. However, other functional assessment methods involving indirect and descriptive approaches are more common in educational settings, and there is not yet consensus about which assessment approach may be most appropriate in these contexts. We conducted functional assessment/analysis using four methods (indirect, descriptive, trial-based, and traditional functional analysis) with a 5-year-old female diagnosed with autism in an inclusive preschool classroom. Using the data from our four assessments, we (a) conducted a demand analysis of instruction and transitions within the TBFA to identify the function of the problem behavior and (b) implemented functional communication training within a reversal design to confirm the TBFA-identified function. Our results demonstrated a functional relation for a single behavior. These findings allow comparison of results across different methods of assessment, show how intervention can validate TBFA findings, and illustrate how follow-up analyses can improve the sensitivity of TBFA data in the classroom.