Conducting a Function-Based Intervention in a School Setting to Reduce Inappropriate Behaviour of a Child With Autism

Abstract

Although function-based interventions have been shown to be effective, the methods utilised to carry out functional behaviour assessments (FBA) have practical limitations. This study explored the relative utility and feasibility of three FBA methods in a school setting to inform a function-based intervention to reduce problem behaviour in a boy with autism. The study consisted of (1) indirect and direct assessments, (2) a modified functional analysis, and (3) the intervention. New video technology, Behavior Capture, was trialled to facilitate data collection in the classroom. All methods contributed to identifying the function of the problematic behaviour, though only the functional analysis provided conclusive results. A peer-mediated intervention based on these findings conducted in the school playground reduced the problem behaviours. All FBA methods could be applied in the school setting and provided useful information. Novel technology was helpful in facilitating data collection. A naturalistic intervention was successful in reducing problem behaviours and increasing play skills.

Évaluation fonctionnelle du comportement en psychoéducation : validité convergente de l’analyse fonctionnelle avec les analyses descriptive et indirecte

“…Tel qu'indiqué précédemment, les chercheurs décrivent le processus d'évaluation fonctionnelle du comportement et la sélection d'intervention fonctionnelle comme de meilleures pratiques dans la réduction des comportements problématiques (Horner et Carr, 1997;Iwata et Dozier, 2008;Myers et Johnson, 2007). L'intervention fonctionnelle (c.-à-d., une intervention basée sur la fonction identifiée lors d'une évaluation) produit une réduction plus rapide et plus efficiente de la fréquence du comportement problématique (Camacho et al, 2014;Lloyd et Kennedy, 2014).…”

Randomization Tests for Single Case Designs with Rapidly Alternating Conditions: An Analysis of p-Values from Published Experiments

“…It is interesting to note that 23 cases (or 66% of the 35 cases that changed from agreement to disagreement on considering family-wise error rate) were perfectly differentiated comparisons between five-session conditions randomized in blocks. In one case, drawn from a functional analysis of nonengaged behavior conducted by Camacho, Anderson, Moore, and Furlonger (2014), problem behavior was observed for 100% of the time in each of five sessions in a test condition and 0% of the time in each of five sessions in a control condition. The p-value associated with this comparison was .031; significant at .05, but not significant when compared to :05…”

Evaluating the Prevent–Teach–Reinforce Model for High School Students With Autism Spectrum Disorder

“…Behavior intervention plans (BIPs) are developed to (a) prevent the occurrence of the problem behavior by developing strategies to directly modify the antecedents; (b) teach functionally equivalent replacement behaviors that are more efficient and effective at getting the reinforcement function than the problem behavior; and (c) changing responses to problem behavior so that they no longer are effective at getting the student the reinforcement function. Evidence exists that shows interventions based on FBAs are effective at reducing problem behavior and increasing appropriate replacement behavior of students with ASD in various grade levels (e.g., Camacho et al, 2014; McComas et al, 2000; Sigafoos et al, 2009). However, it is currently unknown to what extent FBAs are implemented with technical adequacy by typical school practitioners.…”