Instruction in Functional Assessment, 2014a
Instruction in Functional Assessment, 2014a
Instruction in Functional Assessment, 2014a
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>Instruction</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Functional</strong> <strong>Assessment</strong> Chapter 3<br />
gesture, or use of assistive technology devices (Mancil & Boman, 2010). For example, the<br />
<strong>in</strong>dividual may be taught to say “Stop” <strong>in</strong>stead of engag<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> self-<strong>in</strong>jury dur<strong>in</strong>g nonpreferred<br />
groom<strong>in</strong>g activities (Steege et al., 1990). More examples of how a communication<br />
replacement behavior can be taught can be seen <strong>in</strong> the Table 12 below.<br />
Table 12<br />
Examples of communication responses related to the function of the <strong>in</strong>dividual’s challeng<strong>in</strong>g<br />
behavior be<strong>in</strong>g taught<br />
Problem<br />
Behavior<br />
Scream<strong>in</strong>g<br />
For Attention<br />
Hitt<strong>in</strong>g Others<br />
To Be Sent To<br />
Another Room<br />
Grabb<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Food<br />
F<strong>in</strong>ger<br />
Flick<strong>in</strong>g<br />
For Visual<br />
Stimulation<br />
Replacement<br />
behavior that<br />
results <strong>in</strong> the<br />
same re<strong>in</strong>forcer<br />
Ask<strong>in</strong>g for<br />
attention<br />
Ask<strong>in</strong>g to go to<br />
another room<br />
Ask<strong>in</strong>g for food<br />
Click<strong>in</strong>g on<br />
a computer<br />
screen for an<br />
engag<strong>in</strong>g video<br />
display<br />
Consequence-based <strong>in</strong>terventions work to decrease problem behavior by manipulat<strong>in</strong>g events<br />
and/or stimuli that occur immediately after particular behaviors. S<strong>in</strong>ce every treatment program<br />
should <strong>in</strong>clude positive re<strong>in</strong>forcement, the procedures used to identify positive re<strong>in</strong>forcers<br />
will be described. Then, commonly used practices schedules to adm<strong>in</strong>ister re<strong>in</strong>forcement<br />
and ext<strong>in</strong>ction procedures to decrease challeng<strong>in</strong>g behavior will be reviewed.<br />
<br />
The ma<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>gredient for an effective behavior change program is positive re<strong>in</strong>forcement.<br />
A positive re<strong>in</strong>forcer is an object or event that <strong>in</strong>creases the behavior it follows. As<br />
reviewed <strong>in</strong> Chapter 1, the pr<strong>in</strong>ciple of positive re<strong>in</strong>forcement states that when a positive<br />
re<strong>in</strong>forcer is delivered immediately after a behavior, that behavior is more likely to occur<br />
<strong>in</strong> future similar situations (Mart<strong>in</strong> & Pear, 2011). Without consideration of positive<br />
re<strong>in</strong>forcement, the factors responsible for the <strong>in</strong>dividual’s challeng<strong>in</strong>g behavior may still<br />
ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> it, despite efforts to curtail that behavior. Additionally, programm<strong>in</strong>g re<strong>in</strong>forcers<br />
to <strong>in</strong>crease the <strong>in</strong>dividual’s desirable behavior may result <strong>in</strong> the challeng<strong>in</strong>g behaviors be<strong>in</strong>g<br />
‘supplanted’ or over-ridden s<strong>in</strong>ce <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g one behavior will naturally elim<strong>in</strong>ate the likelihood<br />
of engag<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> other behaviors that are re<strong>in</strong>forced less or cannot occur at the same<br />
time. Application of a positive re<strong>in</strong>forcement procedure is not only an effective practice<br />
but also an ethically sound step to <strong>in</strong>clude <strong>in</strong> any <strong>in</strong>tervention program. There are several<br />
considerations when us<strong>in</strong>g a re<strong>in</strong>forcement procedure, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g: (a) <strong>in</strong>corporat<strong>in</strong>g knowledge<br />
of the function for the <strong>in</strong>dividual’s challeng<strong>in</strong>g behavior <strong>in</strong>to treatment design; (b)<br />
validat<strong>in</strong>g that the consequence is <strong>in</strong>deed a re<strong>in</strong>forcer (be-it positive re<strong>in</strong>forcer or negative<br />
re<strong>in</strong>forcer); and (c) maximiz<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>dividual’s motivation for that re<strong>in</strong>forcer.<br />
It is important to demonstrate that the consequence you believe acts as a re<strong>in</strong>forcer<br />
does <strong>in</strong>deed do so. The most accurate way to ensure that you have identified an effective<br />
38