Western New England University.
New England Center for Children.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2020 Jan;53(1):331-354. doi: 10.1002/jaba.598. Epub 2019 Jul 11.
In their review of synthesis within the functional analysis (FA) literature, Slaton and Hanley (2018) reported that most synthesized contingency analyses have included multiple topographies of problem behavior in the reinforcement contingency class. This leaves the question of whether one, some, or all forms of problem behavior are sensitive to the synthesized reinforcement contingencies in published analyses. To address this ambiguity, all topographies of problem behavior that were reported by caregivers to co-occur with the most concerning problem behavior were analyzed for 10 participants. We implemented extinction across one or more forms of problem behavior to determine whether all forms reported to co-occur were sensitive to the same synthesized reinforcement contingency. For nine of 10 participants, the most concerning topographies were sensitive to the same synthesized reinforcement contingencies as the less concerning topographies (results were inconclusive for one). Implications for inferring response class membership from single analyses are discussed.
在对功能分析（FA）文献中的综合研究进行回顾时，Slaton 和 Hanley（2018）报告说，大多数综合的反应关联分析都包含了强化关联类别中多种问题行为的表象。这就提出了一个问题，即在已发表的分析中，是否有一种、几种或所有形式的问题行为对综合强化关联是敏感的。为了解决这种不明确性，我们对 10 名参与者进行了分析，分析了所有与最令人关注的问题行为同时发生的问题行为表象。我们对一种或多种形式的问题行为实施了消退，以确定所有报告的同时发生的行为表象是否对相同的综合强化关联敏感。对于 10 名参与者中的 9 名，最令人关注的表象与不太令人关注的表象对相同的综合强化关联敏感（对一名参与者的结果不确定）。讨论了从单一分析中推断反应类别成员身份的含义。
