Functional Behavior Assessment. Denise Duke, Ed. S. Behavior Specialist Houston County Board of Education

Functional Behavior Assessment Denise Duke, Ed. S. Behavior Specialist Houston County Board of Education

What will we cover today? Why do we do Functional Behavior Assessments (FBA)? What does IDEA-2004 say about conducting an FBA? What does ABC stand for in relation to an FBA? How do you operationally define a target behavior that is observable and measureable? What are the environmental variables that influence and maintain behavior?

Functional Behavior Assessment Definition Functional behavior assessment (FBA) is a process rooted in the science of applied behavior analysis (ABA), which focuses on the relationship between behavior and environmental variables. (Autism Internet Module) It has 3 basic components: Indirect assessment (rating scales, interviews, records review) Descriptive assessment (direct observation, data collection) Functional analysis (experimental manipulation of environmental variables to determine the function of a problem behavior)

What does IDEA require regarding an FBA? An FBA must be conducted: There is a child with a disability Who has been removed from school for 10 days For behavior that interferes with the learning environment For misconduct that either Is a manifestation of his/her disability Is not a manifestation of his/her disability Involves weapons or drugs, or serious bodily injury

Who is responsible for participating in an FBA? The IDEA is not specific regarding who must participate in the FBA process. State and local education agencies have the discretion to determine who conducts or participates in the process.

When should an FBA be conducted? As proactively as possible!!!

The ABC s of an FBA Antecedent environmental events or conditions that occur just prior the behavior of interest. This includes setting events. Behavior The action of interest, commonly referred to as the target behavior (bx). Consequence The environmental event or condition that occurs just after the target behavior that maintains or increases the occurrence of the target behavior.

The 3-Term Contingency

First things first BEHAVIOR!

Overview Michael s Story

Understanding Behavior Those unfamiliar with the science of behavior often offer explanations of behavior that are not helpful for finding a solution. These explanations are often referred to as circular reasoning. He won t sit because he has ADHD. How do you know he has ADHD? I know because he won t sit!

Circular Reasoning

Examples of Very Specific Operational Definitions of Behavior Propel an object with force through the air by movement of hand/arm Using an open or closed hand to strike or attempt to strike the body part and/or clothing of another person/self Projecting matter from mouth (1 inch from body) Forcefully gripping skin between finger(s) and/or thumb (including with enough force to leave a visible mark) Collapsing body from a standing or seated position to lying on the ground in an uncontrolled manner that is not within context of the ongoing activity

Operational Definition of the Problem Behavior

Consequences What do YOU think of when you hear the word CONSEQUENCES? How does it differ from the way it applies to the 3-term Contingency? That s why I prefer the term CONSEQUENT EVENT.

REINFORCERS Consequent events that increase the probability that the behavior they follow will happen again. PUNISHERS Consequent events that decrease the probability that the behavior they follow will happen again. Positive An event, object, or condition is ADDED! Negative An event, object, or condition is REMOVED! Positive An event, object, or condition is ADDED! Negative An event, object, or condition is REMOVED! Candy, attention, computer time Aspirin for a headache, Leaving a crowded room. Spanking Time out

Functions of Problem Behavior Socially mediated positive reinforcement Access to tangibles or attention from peers/adults Socially mediated negative reinforcement Escape from aversive/non-preferred activities Automatic reinforcement in the form of sensory feedback (stereotypical behaviors)

Antecedent Events Discriminative Stimulus (SD) A signal that reinforcement is available. Motivation Operation (MO) Two types Establishing Operation (EO) Increases the value of a reinforcer. Abolishing Operation (AO) Decreases the value of a reinforcer. Setting Events This refers to events that occur before, but not immediately, the behavior of interest. These events can influence behaviors, but are difficult be discovered in the FBA process.

Screening Make sure there isn t a physical issue contributing to the problem behavior. Make sure that there s an actual need for an FBA and that there s not a simple explanation.

Functional Behavior Assessment The ultimate goal of an FBA is to find a functionally equivalent replacement behavior with an emphasis on reinforcement rather than punishment.

Big FBA and little fba little fba observing and adjusting BIG FBA Is this behavior dangerous to the student? Is this behavior dangerous to others? Does this behavior interfere with the student s learning or the learning of others? Does this behavior interfere with socialization? Is the behavior frequent and disruptive?

Indirect Assessment FAST MAS Interview

DATA Collection and Direct Observation Momentary Time Sampling Duration Frequency A-B-C recording

Date: STUDENT: Observer: FREQUENCY CHART TARGET BEHAVIOR: 7:30 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 10:00 10:30 11:00 11:30 12:00 12:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 7:31 8:01 8:31 9:01 9:31 10:01 10:31 11:01 11:31 12:01 12:31 1:01 1:31 2:01 2:31 3:01 7:32 8:02 8:32 9:02 9:32 10:02 10:32 11:02 11:32 12:02 12:32 1:02 1:32 2:02 2:32 3:02 7:33 8:03 8:33 9:03 9:33 10:03 10:33 11:03 11:33 12:03 12:33 1:03 1:33 2:03 2:33 3:03 7:34 8:04 8:34 9:04 9:34 10:04 10:34 11:04 11:34 12:04 12:34 1:04 1:34 2:04 2:34 3:04 7:35 8:05 8:35 9:05 9:35 10:05 10:35 11:05 11:35 12:05 12:35 1:05 1:35 2:05 2:35 3:05 7:36 8:06 8:36 9:06 9:36 10:06 10:36 11:06 11:36 12:06 12:36 1:06 1:36 2:06 2:36 3:06 7:37 8:07 8:37 9:07 9:37 10:07 10:37 11:07 11:37 12:07 12:37 1:07 1:37 2:07 2:37 3:07 7:38 8:08 8:38 9:08 9:38 10:08 10:38 11:08 11:38 12:08 12:38 1:08 1:38 2:08 2:38 3:08 7:39 8:09 8:39 9:09 9:39 10:09 10:39 11:09 11:39 12:09 12:39 1:09 1:39 2:09 2:39 3:09 7:40 8:10 8:40 9:10 9:40 10:10 10:40 11:10 11:40 12:10 12:40 1:10 1:40 2:10 2:40 3:10 7:41 8:11 8:41 9:11 9:41 10:11 10:41 11:11 11:41 12:11 12:41 1:11 1:41 2:11 2:41 3:11 7:42 8:12 8:42 9:12 9:42 10:12 10:42 11:12 11:42 12:12 12:42 1:12 1:42 2:12 2:42 3:12 7:43 8:13 8:43 9:13 9:43 10:13 10:43 11:13 11:43 12:13 12:43 1:13 1:43 2:13 2:43 3:13 7:44 8:14 8:44 9:14 9:44 10:14 10:44 11:14 11:44 12:14 12:44 1:14 1:44 2:14 2:44 3:14 7:45 8:15 8:45 9:15 9:45 10:15 10:45 11:15 11:45 12:15 12:45 1:15 1:45 2:15 2:45 3:15 7:46 8:16 8:46 9:16 9:46 10:16 10:46 11:16 11:46 12:16 12:46 1:16 1:46 2:16 2:46 3:16 7:47 8:17 8:47 9:17 9:47 10:17 10:47 11:17 11:47 12:17 12:47 1:17 1:47 2:17 2:47 3:17 7:48 8:18 8:48 9:18 9:48 10:18 10:48 11:18 11:48 12:18 12:48 1:18 1:48 2:18 2:48 3:18 7:49 8:19 8:49 9:19 9:49 10:19 10:49 11:19 11:49 12:19 12:49 1:19 1:49 2:19 2:49 3:19 7:50 8:20 8:50 9:20 9:50 10:20 10:50 11:20 11:50 12:20 12:50 1:20 1:50 2:20 2:50 3:20 7:51 8:21 8:51 9:21 9:51 10:21 10:51 11:21 11:51 12:21 12:51 1:21 1:51 2:21 2:51 3:21 7:52 8:22 8:52 9:22 9:52 10:22 10:52 11:22 11:52 12:22 12:52 1:22 1:52 2:22 2:52 3:22 7:53 8:23 8:53 9:23 9:53 10:23 10:53 11:23 11:53 12:23 12:53 1:23 1:53 2:23 2:53 3:23 7:54 8:24 8:54 9:24 9:54 10:24 10:54 11:24 11:54 12:24 12:54 1:24 1:54 2:24 2:54 3:24 7:55 8:25 8:55 9:25 9:55 10:25 10:55 11:25 11:55 12:25 12:55 1:25 1:55 2:25 2:55 3:25 7:56 8:26 8:56 9:26 9:56 10:26 10:56 11:26 11:56 12:26 12:56 1:26 1:56 2:26 2:56 3:26 7:57 8:27 8:57 9:27 9:57 10:27 10:57 11:27 11:57 12:27 12:57 1:27 1:57 2:27 2:57 3:27 7:58 8:28 8:58 9:28 9:58 10:28 10:58 11:28 11:58 12:28 12:58 1:28 1:58 2:28 2:58 3:28 7:59 8:29 8:59 9:29 9:59 10:29 10:59 11:29 11:59 12:29 12:59 1:29 1:59 2:29 2:59 3:29

Behavior Intervention Team ABC Data Form Student: Teacher: Date: - - Time Begin- End Target Behaviors Place Where it occurred Context/Activity Antecedent Exactly what happened right before the behavior Consequence What happened right after the behavior Student Reaction

Key for A-B-C Sheet Target BX Place Context/Activity Antecedent Consequence Student Reaction A. Biting B. Hitting C. Throwing things

Functional Analysis THE GOLD STANDARD BUT ONLY FOR A TRAINED PRACTITIONER IN A CLINICAL SETTING!!!!

References Pennington, R. & Szakacs, W. (2014). Understanding behavior through functional behavior assessment: Online training module. In Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence (OCALI), Autism Internet Modules, www.autisminternetmodules.org. Columbus, OH: OCALI. Anderson C. M., & St. Peter, C. C. (2013). Functional analysis with typically developing children: Best practice or too early to tell? In response to Hanley (2012). Behavior Analysis in Practice, 62-73. Barton-Arwood, S. M., Wehby, J. H., Gunter, P. L., & Lane, K. L. (2003). Functional Behavior Assessment Rating Scales: Interrater Reliability with Students with Emotional or Behavioral Disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 28, 386-400. Beavers, G. A., Iwata, B. A., & Lerman, D. C. (2013). Thirty years of research on the functional analysis of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46, 1-21. Chok, J. T., Shlesinger, A., Studer, L., & Bird, F. L. (2012). Description of a practitioner training program on functional analysis and treatment development. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 5, 25. Durand, V. M. & Crimmons, D. B. (1988). Identifying variables maintaining self-injurious behavior. Journal of Autism and Development Disabilities, 18, 99-117. Ervin, R. A., Radford, P. M., Bertsch, K., Piper, A. L., Ehrhardt, K. E., & Poling, A. (2001). A descriptive analysis and critique of the empirical literature on school-based functional assessment. School Psychology Review, 30, 193-211. Fisher, W. W., Ninness, H. A., Piazza, C. C., & Owen DeSchryver, J. S. (1996). On the reinforcing effects of the content of verbal attention. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 235-238. Fritz, J. N., Iwata, B. A., Hammond, J. L., & Bloom, S. E. (2013). Experimental analysis of precursors to severe problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46, 101-129.

References Greer, B. D., Neidert, P. L., Dozier, C. L., Payne, S. W., Zonneveld, K. L., & Harper, A. M. (2013). Functional analysis and treatment of problem behavior in early education classrooms. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46, 289-295. Hanley, G. P., Iwata, B. A., & McCord, B. E. (2003). Functional analysis of problem behavior: A review. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 147-185. Heward, W. L. (2005). Reasons applied behavior analysis is good for education and why those reasons have been insufficient. In W.L. Heward et al. (Eds.) Focus on Behavior Analysis in Education: Achievements, Challenges and Opportunities. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Iwata, B. A., DeLeon, I. G., & Roscoe, E. M. (2013). Reliability and validity of the functional analysis screening tool. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46, 271-284 Iwata, B. A., Dorsey, M. F., Slifer, K. J., Bauman, K. E., & Richman, G. S. (1994). Toward a functional analysis of self-injury. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 2, 3-20. Iwata, B. A., & Dozier, C. L. (2008). Clinical application of functional analysis methodology. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1, 3. Kantor, J. R. (1957). Events and constructs in the science of psychology: Philosophy- Banished and recalled. The Psychological Record, 7, 55-60. Lewis, T., Scott, T. M., Sugai, G. (1994). The problem behavior questionnaire: A teacher-based instrument to develop functional hypotheses of problem behavior in general education classrooms. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 19, 103-115. Matson, J. L., & Vollmer, T. R. (1995). The questions about behavioral function (QABF): User's guide. Baton Rouge, LA: Disability Consultants LLc.

References Michael, J. (1982). Distinguishing between discriminative and motivational functions of stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 149-155. Morris, R. R. (1985). Behavior modification with exceptional children: Principles and practices. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman. Neef, N., & Peterson, S. (2007). Functional behavior assessment. In J. O. Cooper, T. E., Heron, & W. L. Heward (Eds.) Applied Behavior Analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. O'Neill, R. E. Horner, R. H., Albin, R. W., Sprague, J. R., Storey, K., & Newton, J. S. (1997). Functional assessment and program development for problem behavior: A practical handbook. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing. Piazza, C. C., Bowman, L. G., Contrucci, S. A., Delia, M. D., Adelinis, J. D., & Goh, H. L. (1999). An evaluation of the properties of attention as reinforcement for destructive and appropriate behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32,, 437-449. Roscoe, E. M., Iwata, B. A., & Zhou, L. (2013). Assessment and treatment of chronic hand mouthing. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46, 181-198. Solnick, M. D., & Ardoin, S. P. (2010). A quantitative review of functional analysis procedures in public school settings. Education and Treatment of Children, 33, 153-175. Sundberg, M. L., & Partington J. W. (2013). Teaching language to children with autism or other developmental disabilities. Concord, CA: AVB Press. Umbreit, J., Ferro, J., Liaupsin, C. J., & Lane, K. L. (2007). Functional behavior assessment and function based intervention: An effective and practical approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

References Van Houten, R., Axelrod, S., Bailey, J. S., Favell, J. E., Foxx, R. M., Iwata, B. A., & Lovaas, O. I. (1988). The right to effective behavioral treatment. The Behavior Analyst, 11, 111-114. Vollmer, T. R., Marcus, B. A., & Ringdahl, J. E. (1995). Noncontingent escape as treatment for selfinjurious behavior maintained by negative reinforcemen Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 15-26. Wacker, D. P., Lee, J. F., Dalmau, Y. C. P., Kopelman, T. G., Lindgren, S. D., Kuhle, J.,... & Waldron, D. B. (2013). Conducting functional communication training via telehealth to reduce the problem behavior of young children with autism. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 25,, 35-48. Zarcone, J. R., Rodgers, T. A., Iwata, B. A., Rourke, D. A., & Dorsey, M. F. (1991). Reliability analysis of the Motivation Assessment Scale: A failure to replicate. Research in Developmental https://quizlet.com/12464847/operational-definitions-flash-cards/

denise.duke@hcbe.net http://www.atinternetmodules.org/