Interrater Reliability and Convergent Validity of the Trial-Based Functional Analysis

Abstract

The standard functional analysis (FA) has been regarded as the gold standard to identify the function of challenging behavior. The trial-based functional analysis (TBFA) is an alternative FA that takes less time to complete than the standard FA. The primary purpose of this study was to evaluate interrater reliability and convergent validity of the TBFA by comparing it with the standard FA. First, TBFA and standard FA were conducted on three young adults with neurodevelopmental disorders who displayed problem behavior. Then, three expert panelists analyzed and compared graphs depicting TBFA with 5, 10, 15, and 20 trials and standard FA graphs. Panelists reported that they were able to identify a behavior function using the TBFA; however, interrater reliability was substantially lower with 5 trials than for 10, 15, or 20 trials, and was highest with 10 trials. Results suggest that reliability of the TBFA may be improved by including more than five trials in the analysis. Results of the TBFA and standard FA converged for only one of the three participants. Lack of convergence may have been due, in part, to differences in presentation of establishing operations between the two assessments. Although preliminary, it is possible that clinicians should consider using more than 5 trials when interpreting the function of problem behavior using the TBFA. Limitations and future research are discussed.