Abstract
The development of functional analysis (FA) methodologies allows the identification of the reinforcers that maintain problem behavior and improved intervention efficacy in the form of function-based treatments. Despite the profound impact of FA on clinical practice and research, questions still remain about the methods by which clinicians and researchers interpret FA graphs. In the current study, 141 FA data sets were evaluated using the structured visual-inspection criteria developed by Hagopian et al. (1997). However, the criteria were modified for FAs of varying lengths. Interobserver agreement assessments revealed high agreement coefficients across expert judges, postdoctoral reviewers, master's-level reviewers, and postbaccalaureate reviewers. Once the validity of the modified visual-inspection procedures was established, the utility of those procedures was examined by using them to categorize the maintaining reinforcement contingency related to problem behavior for all 141 data sets and for the 101 participants who contributed to the 141 data sets.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
