Conducting a Structural and Consequence Analysis to Test the Hypothesis of Behavior Function: A Case Study of Self-Injurious Behavior

QUESTION

In this unit, we covered how we can test the hypothesis of the function of behavior using the Functional Analysis. The difference between FBA (Functional Behavior Assessment) and FA (Functional Analysis) is that with FBA we are forming a hypothesis about the functional relationship between antecedent and consequence conditions and behavior. With Functional Analysis, we are confirming or proving that these hypothesized relationships are indeed cause and effect relationships. This is done through systematic manipulation of antecedents and consequences to prove that these are the variables that are responsible for the interfering behavior

Debbie is a ten-year-old student at Pine Valley Elementary school. She was previously diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder at the age of two. Debbie has, historically, engaged in self-injurious behavior (SIB), including head banging, which has resulted in significant facial injury. A previous functional behavior assessment was conducted by the BCBA from the school district and it was determined that the function of the SIB appeared to be escape from non-preferred tasks or demands. The teacher was not sure that the results were accurate, as she felt that Debbie was usually compliant with most requests. You are taking over this case and have determined that a structural and consequence analysis should be completed to test the hypothesis that difficult tasks are the antecedent to SIB.

According to the examples in the text, how would you conduct a structural analysis for this scenario? Be sure to discuss specific antecedent conditions that could be presented and how you would collect data.

According to the examples in the text, how would you conduct a consequence analysis for this scenario? Be sure to discuss specific consequence conditions that could be presented and how you would collect data.

ANSWER

Conducting a Structural and Consequence Analysis to Test the Hypothesis of Behavior Function: A Case Study of Self-Injurious Behavior

Introduction

In behavior analysis, conducting a Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA) is crucial for understanding the function of interfering behaviors. By examining the antecedent conditions and consequences associated with the behavior, professionals can develop hypotheses about the behavior’s function. This essay explores a case study involving Debbie, a ten-year-old student with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), who engages in self-injurious behavior (SIB). We will discuss how a structural analysis and a consequence analysis can be conducted to test the hypothesis that difficult tasks serve as the antecedent for the SIB.

Structural Analysis

A structural analysis focuses on identifying specific antecedent conditions that may trigger the behavior of interest. In the case of Debbie’s SIB, the hypothesis suggests that difficult tasks or demands are the antecedents. To conduct a structural analysis, several antecedent conditions could be presented and data collected to determine their impact on Debbie’s behavior.

Difficult Task Antecedent

The BCBA could design tasks of varying difficulty levels and observe Debbie’s behavior during each task. Data could be collected on the occurrence and intensity of SIB, as well as the duration of engagement with the task. The tasks could be modified to include academic, social, or daily living skills components to cover different domains relevant to Debbie’s educational setting.

Transition Antecedent

Transitions between activities or locations can also be potential antecedents for SIB. The BCBA could systematically vary the transition demands, such as the time allotted for transition, the type of support provided, or the level of independence expected during transitions. Data on the occurrence of SIB before, during, and after transitions could be collected to determine their influence on behavior.

Demand Sequence Antecedent

The sequence in which demands or tasks are presented might impact the occurrence of SIB. The BCBA could manipulate the order and arrangement of tasks to examine the effect on Debbie’s behavior. Data could be collected on the occurrence and intensity of SIB for different demand sequences.

Consequence Analysis

A consequence analysis examines the consequences that follow the occurrence of the behavior to determine their reinforcing properties. For Debbie’s SIB, the hypothesis suggests that escape from non-preferred tasks serves as a reinforcing consequence. Conducting a consequence analysis involves manipulating and observing the consequences associated with the behavior.

Escape Consequence

The BCBA could design trials where Debbie is provided an opportunity to escape or avoid a non-preferred task upon engaging in SIB. Data could be collected on the occurrence, intensity, and duration of SIB during and after escape opportunities. This would help determine if escaping the task results in an increase in SIB.

Attention Consequence

Attention from others might serve as a reinforcing consequence for the behavior. The BCBA could manipulate attention by providing differential attention following the occurrence of SIB. Data could be collected on the occurrence of SIB in the presence and absence of attention from peers and adults to assess the impact of attention on the behavior.

Tangible Consequence

If access to preferred items or activities serves as a reinforcing consequence, the BCBA could manipulate access to preferred items following the occurrence of SIB. Data on the occurrence of SIB during and after the presentation or removal of preferred items could be collected to examine the influence of tangible consequences.

Conclusion

Conducting a structural analysis and a consequence analysis is essential in testing hypotheses about the function of interfering behaviors. In the case of Debbie’s self-injurious behavior, a structural analysis can help determine if difficult tasks are indeed the antecedent conditions triggering the behavior. Likewise, a consequence analysis can shed light on whether escape from non-preferred tasks is a reinforcing consequence for the SIB. By systematically manipulating antecedent and consequence conditions and collecting data on Debbie’s behavior, the BCBA can gather empirical evidence to confirm or revise the hypothesis and inform appropriate intervention strategies to address the SIB effectively.