Calculating Contingencies in Natural Environments: Issues in the Application of Sequential Analysis

Abstract

Analysis and interpretation of behavior-environment relations are increasingly being conducted with data that have been derived descriptively. This paper provides an overview of the logic that underlies a sequential analytic approach to the analysis of descriptive data. Several methods for quantifying sequential relations are reviewed along with their strengths and weaknesses. Data from descriptive analyses are used to illustrate key points. Issues germane to contingency analysis in natural environments are discussed briefly. It is concluded that the conceptual distinctions among contiguity, contingency, and dependency are critical if the logic of sequential analysis is to be extended successfully to a behavior-analytic account of reinforcement in natural environments.

Using ABC narrative recording to identify the function of problem behavior: A pilot study

“…Calculations are then carried out to determine the probability of the behavior given the occurrence of specific antecedents, consequences, or both (McComas, Moore, Dahl, Hartman, Hoch, & Symons, 2009).…”

Parent-Implemented Communication Intervention

“…Time-window sequential analyses can be used to determine contingencies between antecedent and target behaviors in experimental and descriptive data (McComas et al, 2009). Yule's Q sequential analysis is not dependent on or influenced by the number of event sequences or total behavior tallies (i.e., instances of recorded behavior).…”

Observing signs of pain in relation to self‐injurious behaviour among individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities

“…pain‐related behaviour and self‐injury) occurred together in time more than chance would predict, and negative values indicating that the two behaviours occurred together in time less than chance would predict. We chose Yule's Q as a measure of association as opposed to conditional or transitional probabilities because Yule's Q controls for the base rate of the target behaviour, thus allowing for comparisons across observations and participants (Bakeman & Gottman 1997; Yoder & Feurer 2000; McComas et al . 2009).…”