A comparison of sources of baseline data for treatments of problem behavior following a functional analysis

Application of a terminal schedule probe method to inform schedule thinning with multiple schedules

Multiple schedules are effective at decreasing challenging behavior and maintaining alternative behavior at acceptable levels. Currently, no conclusive guidance is available for empirically deriving multiple-schedule components (continuous reinforcement for alternative behavior and extinction for challenging behavior [discriminative stimulus] and extinction for both alternative and challenging behavior [delta stimulus]) during the schedule-thinning process. In the current investigation, we describe a terminal schedule probe method to determine delta stimulus starting points and strategies for subsequent schedule-thinning progressions to reach caregiver-informed terminal schedules. We review schedule-thinning outcomes for a clinical cohort using a consecutive controlled case series approach and report results for two groups: One group included applications of terminal probe thinning (n = 24), and the other involved traditional dense-to-lean thinning (n = 18). Outcomes suggest that the terminal schedule probe method produced effective treatments with less resurgence of challenging behavior and leaner, more feasible, multiple schedules.

A comparative effectiveness trial of functional behavioral assessment methods

Clinicians report primarily using functional behavioral assessment (FBA) methods that do not include functional analyses. However, studies examining the correspondence between functional analyses and other types of FBAs have produced inconsistent results. In addition, although functional analyses are considered the gold standard, their contribution toward successful treatment compared with other FBA methods remains unclear. This comparative effectiveness study, conducted with 57 young children with autism spectrum disorder, evaluated the results of FBAs that did (n = 26) and did not (n = 31) include a functional analysis. Results of FBAs with and without functional analyses showed modest correspondence. All participants who completed functional communication training achieved successful outcomes regardless of the type of FBA conducted.

Evaluating sources of baseline data using dual-criteria and conservative dual-criteria methods: A quantitative analysis

Scheithauer et al. (2020) recently demonstrated that differences in the source of baseline data extracted from a functional analysis (FA) may not affect subsequent clinical decision-making in comparison to a standard baseline. These outcomes warrant additional quantitative examination, as correspondence of visual analysis has sometimes been reported to be unreliable. In the current study, we quantified the occurrence of false positives within a dataset of FA and baseline data using the dual-criteria (DC) and conservative dual-criteria (CDC) methods. Results of this quantitative analysis suggest that false positives were more likely when using FA data (rather than original baseline data) as the initial treatment baseline. However, both sources of baseline data may have acceptably low levels of false positives for practical use. Overall, the findings provide preliminary quantitative support for the conclusion that determinations of effective treatment may be easily obtained using different sources of baseline data.