Evaluation of an indirect assessment for identifying tasks for functional analysis

Abstract

Although a demand analysis is helpful for identifying potential establishing operations for the functional analysis (FA) demand condition, it may not always be practical due to time constraints. A potential alternative is the Negative Reinforcement Rating Scale (NRRS), an indirect assessment tool that may serve as a time efficient alternative to a demand analysis. The experimenter assessed the reliability and validity of the NRRS for 5 individuals with autism spectrum disorder who exhibited problem behavior. Multiple types of interrater reliability were assessed across 2 informants, and NRRS outcomes were compared to a subsequent demand analysis and FA to assess its validity. Reliability was high (M = 84%) for NRRS numerical ratings of categories but low (M = 32.9%) for specific examples provided. NRRS‐identified highly aversive tasks yielded better correspondence with demand analysis outcomes than did NRRS‐identified less aversive tasks.

Concurrent schedules of differential reinforcement of alternative behavior in the treatment of problem behavior without extinction

“…Jaxon and Levi's clinicians reported that they had previously conducted functional analyses that indicated problem behavior was maintained by escape from instructions. When interviewing their treatment team, the experimenter administered the Negative Reinforcement Rating Scale (Wiggins & Roscoe, 2019) to determine which instructions to include in the test condition of the functional analysis. Liam and Owen's clinicians reported that they had previously conducted functional analyses that indicated problem behavior was maintained by access to tangible items.…”

The effect of immediate help with demand completion on escape-maintained challenging behavior.

“…Behavior analysts use demand assessments to identify low-aversive demands (i.e., demands associated with less challenging behavior) and high-aversive demands (i.e., demands associated with more challenging behavior). During a demand assessment, researchers typically evaluate the rate of challenging behavior (e.g., Roscoe et al, 2009;Wiggins & Roscoe, 2020), the latency to engage in challenging behavior (e.g., Call et al, 2009Call et al, , 2016Schmidt et al, 2014;Zarcone et al, 1999), or demand selection (e.g., Zangrillo et al, 2020) to identify highaversive and low-aversive demands. Behavior analysts may conduct demand assessments for participants with escape-maintained challenging behavior prior to functional analyses (FAs) to identify relevant demands to include during the escape condition (Lloveras et al, 2020).…”

“…Behavior analysts may conduct demand assessments for participants with escape-maintained challenging behavior prior to functional analyses (FAs) to identify relevant demands to include during the escape condition (Lloveras et al, 2020). The results from these studies indicate that behavior analysts are more likely to identify negatively reinforced challenging behavior when demands that are associated with higher rates of challenging behavior are included in the escape condition (Call et al, 2009(Call et al, , 2016Roscoe et al, 2009;Schmidt et al, 2014;Wiggins & Roscoe, 2020;Zangrillo et al, 2020).…”