M6-Functional Behavior Assessment Report.edited

docx

School

Florida Institute of Technology *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

5115

Subject

Psychology

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by Dr_Boulder_Jellyfish5

M6: Functional Behavior Assessment Report Charity Pauley Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College-Arizona State University SPFE 527: Behavior Analytic Assessment Lead Instructor: Dr. Sarah Blumberg Co-Instructor Colleen Pilcher February 18, 2024

Functional Behavior Assessment Report Summary Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA) was evaluated for a 3-and-a-half-year-old boy named "Pete" at his family residence. Pete resides with his parents, older brother, younger sister, several aunts, uncles, an older female cousin, and grandparents. The household is bilingual, with English being the predominant language spoken, except by the grandparents. Pete was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) at the age of 2. The assessment incorporated indirect and direct methods to determine the function of his challenging behaviors. Pete's mother completed the Functional Assessment Screening Tool (FAST, Iwata, B., & DeLeon, I., 2005) on 2/16/2024, while Antecedent-Behavior-Consequence (ABC) data was collected from 2/13-2/16/2024 during ABA sessions held on Tuesdays-Fridays from 9 am-12 pm. Target Behavior Pete, a 3-and-a-half-year-old boy, is characterized by his loving and adventurous personality. He exhibits behaviors commonly associated with tantrums, such as moving to another room, crying, and screaming. These behaviors tend to occur when Pete is awakened by someone rather than waking up naturally. The frequency of these tantrums is approximately 1-2 times per week, with each episode lasting between 2-10 minutes. Additionally, Pete displays these behaviors when he cannot access a desired item or activity, when a desired object or activity is removed, or when he is asked to engage in an undesired task. FAST Results

On February 16, 2024, the assessor conducted a structured interview with Pete's mother during our regular ABA session. This interview aimed to administer the FAST (Iwata, B., & DeLeon, 1., 2005), a questionnaire comprising 27 yes/no questions. Its primary objective is to identify the circumstances in which challenging behaviors are most and least likely to manifest. The graphed data obtained from the FAST assessment is presented below. FAST RESULTS ITEMSANSWERED YES o N W R OO NN O ATTENTION TANGIBLE ESCAPE AUTOMATIC AUTOMATIC POSITIVE NEGATIVE ABC-R Data Analysis & Hypothesized Function To collect unbiased data on the environmental factors that may be linked to Pete's tantrum behavior, an Antecedent-Behavior-Consequence (ABC) chart was utilized. This chart, completed by the assessor in Pete's home, contains pertinent information such as the date and time of each incident, the location and activities during each incident, individuals present or involved, the antecedent (what occurs immediately before the incident), the behavior (in this case, "tantrums" as previously defined), the consequences (what happens immediately after the

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

behavior), and Pete's response to the consequence (e.g., whether the behavior continues, escalates, or ceases). When an ABC data sheet includes information on the student's response, it may be referred to as an ABC-R chart (Boutot, 2019). Upon analyzing the ABC-R data, it was found that the most common antecedents to Pete's tantrums were the denial or removal of preferred items or activities and being asked to perform tasks. No other antecedents were identified during the evaluation. The most frequent consequence of Pete's tantrums was receiving attention from the assessor or a family member present during the behavior. Family members would comfort Pete by hugging him and instructing him to listen and comply with the assessor's instructions. The assessor would implement a "First_, Then_" approach with Pete, asking him to complete a task before engaging in preferred activities. No other consequences were observed for his tantrum behaviors. It is worth noting that when the staff offered the "first-then" option, Pete's tantrum would cease (although on two occasions, he continued to cry for a few minutes), and he would comply with their requests. Based on the data obtained from the ABC-R analysis, it can be inferred that the primary function of Pete's tantrum behavior is to gain access to tangible items. This means that when Pete is informed that he cannot have something or is instructed to put away an item he wishes to continue using, he resorts to tantrum behaviors in order to obtain (or maintain access to) that particular item. The evidence suggests that the desire for tangible items is the most probable motive behind Pete's tantrum behavior.

FA Procedures & Hypothetical Results Behavior analysts and other professionals widely employ Functional Analysis (FA) procedures to validate a hypothesized function of behavior that was discovered through a Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA) process. The subsequent FA procedures will be carried out to confirm that a desire for tangible items indeed drives Pete's behavior. Tangible Condition To determine if his conduct has a concrete purpose, we will initially carry out a preference assessment of recognized or suspected preferred items to identify his top 2-3 favored items. Pete will be granted unrestricted access to each item for 10 minutes. After 10 minutes with each item, Pete will be instructed, "It's time to put the item away now." If Pete exhibits tantrum behavior, we will promptly inform him, "Okay, you can have an additional 5 minutes". If the behavior ceases after the additional time is given, we can deduce that the behavior is fulfilling a tangible purpose. If the tantrum behavior does not occur or persists even after the extra time is provided, we can determine that the purpose is likely unrelated to tangible access. This process will be repeated across four sessions. Escape Condition To evaluate whether his conduct is driven by an escape function, indicating that he throws tantrums to evade a task or activity, we will initially impose a moderately challenging demand on Pete. For example, we may task him with tacting his ABCs, given his aversion

towards what he refers to as "work". If Pete throws a tantrum following this demand, we will reassure him by stating, “Okay, buddy, we don't have to do ABCs today." To confirm the link between the behavior and escape function, we expect to observe Pete's tantrum shortly after the demand is made, followed by its cessation upon being informed that he no longer needs to complete the task. If the behavior does not occur following a task demand, or if it persists or escalates despite being excused from continuing, we would deduce that the function is not related to escape. The escape scenario will be replicated across four sessions. Attention Condition In order to evaluate attention function, Pete will be given a moderately easy task, like playing with kinetic sand, which is not highly preferred. While Pete is engaged in this task, we will be present nearby but not provide any attention to him. We will communicate to Pete that he should play with the sand while I talk with Mom. If Pete displays tantrum behavior, we will promptly offer him attention. This attention could involve redirection, such as saying, "Pete, we are talking, you need to go play, or Hey, Pete, you need to stop crying." If the tantrum behavior seeks attention, we anticipate observing the behavior shortly after attention is withheld and for either not occurring during the attention condition or persisting or intensifying after attention is provided. The attention condition will be replicated over four sessions. Play Condition In order to assess for an automatic function, we will conduct the "play"” or "control" condition. This condition will provide Pete with access to his preferred items, attention, and no

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

task demands. For instance, we will interact with Pete using his favorite toys, such as his “Marvel” figures, while engaging in conversation, offering praise, and playing with him without requesting him to complete specific tasks. Suppose Pete does not engage in tantrum behavior during the play condition. In that case, it can be inferred that the behavior does not serve an automatic function related to seeking pleasure, sensory stimulation, or relief from uncomfortable stimulation; however, if Pete does exhibit the behavior during the play condition. In that case, it suggests that the behavior serves at least a partial automatic function, although the exact purpose (stimulation or relief) remains uncertain. The play condition will be repeated over four sessions. FA Procedures, Setting, and Hypothetical Results Pete's residence will serve as the setting for conducting all functional analysis conditions, overseen by the designated assessor. Each condition will be repeated over four sessions, deliberately alternating to ensure that no two conditions are repeated in consecutive sessions. The data sheet required for documentation purposes is included in the appendix. During each session, the assessor will record the frequency of tantrum behaviors. A graph will display the total count of observed behaviors per session. The graph below illustrates hypothetical data indicating a potential tangible function.

Functional Analysis 3e ° ° ® 2 1/\ . Oe ° ° ® Session 1 Session 2 Session 3 Session 4 w=@== TANGIBLE ==@== ATTENTION ==@w= ESCAPE ==@== PLAY

References Iwata, B., & DeLeon, I. (2005). The functional analysis screening tool. Gainesville, FL: The Florida Center on Self-Injury, University of Florida.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

10 Appendix Appendix FAST Protocol/Results ABC-R Data Date/ Activity/Setting/ ANTECEDENT | BEHAVIOR | CONSEQUENC | RESPONSE Time People/ E 2/13/2024 Transitioning from free | Asked to put Tantrum The assessor states | Escalates for 10:00- play and start “work” in | favorite toys involving to return to “work” | 2 minutes, 10:20am the kitchen with the away and start elopement to | area and a “First First, Then assessor, mom, and little | ABC tacting the living work, Then we can | SD given 2x, sister present activity room, crying, | have playtime” by then and instruction given, | stops. screaming assessor takes child by hand and leads back to “work” area. 2/14/2024 | Finishing up breakfast Told to put Tantrum, Told that after he | Tantrum 9:00am- and transitioning into breakfast dishes | involving, cleaned up, he escalated 9:45am ABA session, mom, in sink, clean up | crying with could play with until little sister, aunt, and area, and start tears, toys for 5 minutes | assessor,

11 assessor present “work” (today screaming before starting mom and we were going to | and throwing | work aunt told work on self on the client that numbers floor mom would clean up and client could go play for a few minutes. 2/14/2024 | Transitioning from free | The Assessor The client The client is told Escalates 10:00am- | play to working on hands the client | grabs for to wait till the until 10:30am numbers (using puzzle the puzzle board | numbers, and | assessor shows assessor board), mom, little sister, and assessor present and holds onto the number pieces that go into the board the assessor holds them from him to have instructional control. Client tantrums (screaming, crying, no tears, kicking) him the number, and he tells her the number before being given the piece to put into the board. gives the SD “to wait and tell the number” first, then can have piece, then stops

12 2/15/2024 11:00am- 11:30am In play area with assessor and little sister. Free play is happening. Little sister takes the toy that client wants. Client yells and tries to grab toy and push little sister Assessor tells client that little sister can play with that one right now and to get another toy to play with. Client escalates BX, when assessor tells him to get another toy, escalation continues, does not end until assessor removes him from room and gives him another preferred activity (IPad play). FA Data Collection Sheet

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

13 Condition Tangible Escape Attention Play Session 1 4 1 3 0 2 5 2 3 0 3 5 1 3 0 4 6 1 3 0

M6-Functional Behavior Assessment Report.edited

Related Documents