University of Nebraska Medical Center, Munroe Meyer Institute.
Rutgers University, Rutgers Biomedical and Health Sciences.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2022 Oct;55(4):1280-1293. doi: 10.1002/jaba.945. Epub 2022 Jul 12.
Visual inspection is the traditional method behavior analysts use to interpret functional-analysis results. Limitations of visual inspection include lack of standardized rules, subjectivity, and inconsistent interrater reliability (Fisch, 1998). To address these limitations, researchers have developed, evaluated, and refined structured criteria to aid interpretation of functional analyses of destructive behavior (Hagopian et al., 1997; Roane et al., 2013; Saini et al., 2018). The current study applied the structured criteria Saini et al. (2018) described to functional analyses of inappropriate mealtime behavior. We assessed its predictive validity and evaluated its efficiency relative to 3 post hoc visual inspection procedures. Validity metrics were lower than those in Saini et al. however, ongoing visual inspection increased the efficiency of functional analyses by more than 30%. We discuss these findings relative to the procedural differences between functional analyses of destructive behavior and inappropriate mealtime behavior.
目视检查是行为分析师用于解释功能分析结果的传统方法。目视检查的局限性包括缺乏标准化规则、主观性和不一致的评分者间可靠性（Fisch，1998）。为了解决这些局限性，研究人员已经开发、评估和完善了结构化标准，以帮助解释破坏性行为的功能分析（Hagopian 等人，1997；Roane 等人，2013；Saini 等人，2018）。本研究将 Saini 等人（2018）描述的结构化标准应用于不适当的进餐时间行为的功能分析。我们评估了其预测有效性，并相对于 3 种事后目视检查程序评估了其效率。有效性指标低于 Saini 等人的指标，但持续的目视检查使功能分析的效率提高了 30%以上。我们讨论了这些发现相对于破坏性行为和不适当的进餐时间行为的功能分析之间的程序差异。
