|
| Advances in Assessment of Challenging Behavior: Competing Stimuli, Screeners, and Accounting for States of Discomfort |
| Monday, May 26, 2025 |
| 10:00 AM–11:50 AM |
| Marriott Marquis, M4 Level, Archives |
| Area: DDA/AUT; Domain: Applied Research |
| Chair: Yanerys Leon (University of Miami) |
| Discussant: Nathalie Fernandez (Kennedy Krieger Institute) |
| CE Instructor: Yanerys Leon, Ph.D. |
| Abstract: Functional analysis methods have been extended to a) improve efficiency and ecological validity and b) increase effectiveness and adoptability. The researchers in this symposium will report on a range of recent research in the assessment of challenging behavior. Researchers will report on an extension of the functional analysis screener approach to automatic and socially mediated behavior in an effort to a) identify subtypes of automatically reinforced SIB and b) develop hypotheses about socially mediated reinforcers based on results of the enhanced screener. A second study describes the potential interaction between states of discomfort and the occurrence and function of challenging behavior and proposes a model to evaluate such interactions. Finally, two separate studies report on advances in competing stimulus assessments including (a) a method for identifying competing responses for a high-rate alternative response (i.e., FCR) and (b) validity and efficiency of a latency-based measurement approach. Implications for future research and practice will be discussed. |
| Instruction Level: Intermediate |
| Keyword(s): challenging behavior, Competing stimulus, functional analysis, pain |
| Target Audience: Intermediate; practitioners; researchers |
Learning Objectives: 1. Learners will be able to define Latency Based Competing Stimulus Assessment and tact at least one advantage of using latency as a dependent measure in a CSA.
2. Learners will be able to describe a screener approach to identify subtypes of automatic SIB
3. Learners will be able to describe the impact of states of discomfort on the occurence of problem behavior |
| |
| Correspondence Between Rate-Based and Latency-Based Competing Stimulus Assessment (LBCSA) for Automatically Maintained Self-Injurious Behavior |
| SABRINA OLIVERA (University of Florida), Michelle A. Frank-Crawford (Kennedy Krieger Institute), Drew E. Piersma (Kennedy Krieger Institute), Zhibo Rong (UF; UMBC; KKI) |
| Abstract: Competing stimulus assessments (CSA) are highly effective in identifying stimuli associated with reductions in challenging behavior. However, CSAs have been reported to be inefficient in terms of time needed to conduct the assessment. Recently, Imler and Weyman (2024) modified CSA procedures to terminate session following the first instance of challenging behavior and termed it the Latency-Based Competing Stimulus Assessment (LBCSA). Although the researchers found that the LBCSA was effective in identifying competing stimuli, it was not compared to the traditional rate-based CSA. Thus, the purpose of this study was to extend the work of Imler and Weyman (2024) by identifying the correspondence between the rate-based CSA and LBCSA across 2 individuals with automatically maintained self-injurious behavior. The overall outcomes were similar across the two CSAs. An extended treatment evaluation was conducted and included stimuli nominated as high and low competition in both CSAs as well as stimuli associated with mixed correspondence (high competition in the rate-based CSA and low competition in the LBCSA). CSAs outcomes were validated during treatment for the high- and low-competition stimuli; however, the rate-based CSA was a better predictor of treatment outcomes for the mix-correspondence stimulus. Implications for patient safety and assessment efficiency are discussed. |
| |
| A Clinical Evaluation and Validation of a Competing Stimulus Assessment Targeting Excessive Functional Communication Responses |
| DREW E. PIERSMA (Kennedy Krieger Institute), Michelle A. Frank-Crawford (Kennedy Krieger Institute), Margaret Cavanaugh (Kennedy Krieger Institute), Lauren Leask (KKI), Savannah Tate (Kennedy Krieger Institute) |
| Abstract: During competing stimulus assessments (CSAs) for socially maintained challenging behavior, challenging behavior is reinforced with access to the functional reinforcer and the degree to which the test stimuli compete with challenging behavior is measured. An alternative to reinforcing challenging behavior may be to reinforce the functional communication response (FCR) taught as a replacement. Such an assessment may be efficacious in identifying stimuli that compete with excessive FCRs during extinction of a multiple schedule while also preventing challenging behavior from occurring, potentially improving safety of the CSA. The current study evaluated the utility of a CSA targeting FCRs for four individuals with tangibly maintained challenging behavior and then validated those findings in a treatment evaluation for three of the participants. The FCRs were lower when competing stimuli were present and challenging behavior remained low during schedule thinning. These findings support the use of CSAs that target FCRs when treating challenging behavior. |
| |
| Further Evaluation of Functional Analysis Screening Methods |
| ALEXANDRA RAMIREZ (University of Miami), Yanerys Leon (University of Miami), Janelle Kirstie Bacotti (University of Miami), Grace Sigwanz (University of Miami), Victoria George (University of Miami) |
| Abstract: Functional analysis (FA; Iwata et al., 1982/1994) is the gold standard in assessment of problem behavior; however, adoption by clinicians is low. Researchers have developed modifications to improve the efficiency of FAs which may increase adoption in clinical practice. For example, Querim et al., 2013 reported high predictive validity of an automatic reinforcer screener (increased efficiency for automatically-reinforced behavior). Slanzi et al., 2022 extended this work by evaluating consecutive no interaction conditions as a screener for automatic and socially-mediated reinforcement demonstrating the utility of FA screening methods to socially-mediated behavior. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a two-condition enhanced functional analysis screener (no interaction and play). A secondary purpose was to evaluate response patterns in the enhanced functional analysis screener for a) subtyping automatically reinforced behavior and b) correspondence with socially-mediated functions of problem behavior. Eight children with ASD participated. Results of the screener accurately predicted socially-mediated or automatic reinforcement for 8/8 participants (5 socially-mediated; 3 automatic). Results for applying the subtyping method demonstrated subtype correspondence for 2/3 participants (automatic reinforcement functions). Retrospective analysis of alternative responses emitted during the screener corresponded with socially-mediated FA outcomes for 3/4 participants. |
| |
Evaluating Possible Interactions Between Challenging Behavior and Pain and Discomfort States |
| JANAE' A. PENDERGRASS (University of Florida), Lindsay Lloveras (Marcus Autism Center), Kerri P. Peters (University of Florida), Kacie McGarry (University of Florida), Justin Boyan Han (University of Florida) |
| Abstract: The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of a method to repeatedly measure both pain and discomfort symptoms and challenging behavior. Multiple pain and discomfort states were evaluated (i.e., gastrointestinaI distress, fevers and cold symptoms, bug bites and mouth pain). A trial based functional analysis (TBFA) was utilized to identify the relation between pain and discomfort symptoms and challenging behavior. The results suggest that (1) direct measures of pain and discomfort can be collected repeatedly and reliably for multiple known pain and / or discomfort states, and (2) the Trial Based Functional Analysis is a feasible assessment tool for identifying fluctuations in response allocation and response latency when symptoms are present or absent. The current methodology serves as a viable and fluid assessment package for identifying the influence of pain and discomfort on challenging behavior. Results are discussed in terms of Implications for future research and practice. |
|
| |