Unobtrusive Measures in Behavioral Assessment

Abstract

A major distinguishing characteristic of behavioral assessment is the direct assessment of overt behavior. Direct assessment is assumed to provide a sample of behavior that reflects client performance in the situation in which behavior is assessed, even if the assessment procedures were not implemented. Yet, in the majority of investigations, behavioral assessment procedures are obtrusive, i.e., subjects are aware that their behavior is being assessed. The potential problem with obtrusive assessment is that it may be reactive, i.e., affect how subjects perform. Recent research has demonstrated that obtrusive observations often are reactive and that behaviors assessed under obtrusive and unobtrusive conditions bear little relation. From methodological and applied perspectives, additional attention needs to be given to unobtrusive measures of behavior change. The present paper illustrates unobtrusive measures in behavior modification including direct observations, archival records, and physical traces of performance. In addition, validation and assessment problems, questions about the obtrusiveness of the measures, and ethical issues are discussed.

Social Skills Group for Adults Living with Intellectual Disabilities

“…Which is why it is necessary to conduct an initial clinical evaluation in order to gather information on the causes of patient difficulties? Certain authors [3, 22,23] have underlined the importance of a behavioral evaluation before any intervention is undertaken. …”

Identification of motivations for unsafe driving actions and potential countermeasures

“…These checklist strategies include sign analyses and field formats. According to such strategies, observers classify behaviors with specific behavioral codes (Kazdin 1979). In sign analyses, a number of specific acts or Incidents that may occur during a period of observation are listed beforehand; the record shows the behaviors that occurred and their frequency during a period of observation (Medley and Mitzel 1963).…”

The Nature of Behavioral Assessment: A Commentary

“…Frederiksen et al (1979) provide another example by advocating the analysis of chemical by-products of smoking. As discussed by Kazdin (1979), such indirect measures have the advantage of being less obtrusive and consequently less reactive than more direct measures.…”

“…Given the situational specificity of behavior, many aspects of the assessment situation may affect the subject's behavior. Because of the possible reactivity of obtrusive assessment techniques, Kazdin (1979) advocates the use of unobtrusive measures. Martinez-Diaz and Edelstein (1979) found that instructions to act in a competent fashion versus neutral instructions did not affect heterosocial behavior, but portraying the measurement situation as pretreatment assessment versus an experiment did affect at least a few of the dependent variables.…”