Unit 3 study questions

.docx

School

University of Central Florida *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

541

Subject

Psychology

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

6

Uploaded by AgentPuppy3534 on coursehero.com

Unit 3 Study Questions Paper Crishtine A. Sundar The Chicago School of Professional Psychology AB 564-Behavior Assessment B Scott. Larson-McGuire May 21, 2022
Unit 3 Study Questions Paper The following questions refer to the Paclawskyj et al. (2000) study: (#1 and #3 are required) 1. How might the use of functional analysis (FA) used in applied settings be compared to those used in analogue settings? When accounting for how FA can be used in analogue settings, one must consider the advantage that comes from absorbed learning that occurs through manipulation of the environment. For example, the environmental variables can help distinguish between behavior that is peer or caregiver mediated and those that are not. Paclawskyj et al. (2000) mention that in analogue settings it is both highly specific and time consuming, even though it can help distinguish and identify the features of an intervention. Thus it can be summarized to state that in applied settings FA’s are more efficient but in analogue settings the assessments are time consuming. 2. What are some advantages and disadvantages of functional analysis conducted in applied vs. analogue settings? (Extra Credit) In the applied setting the practitioners have the ability to arrange and manipulate situations in the environment which can make it easier to implement however there are other environmental factors that can play and make, maintain or cause further problem behaviors. With analog settings, there is more control over the environment and the types of variables the client is exposed to however it is more time consuming and needs an in- depth analysis of the clients natural environment.
3. What other types of assessments have been studied and were found to be more efficient than experimental functional analyses? How do data collection methods used in these types of assessment compare to those used in experimental functional analyses. There are many types of other assessments that have been studied and of those the functional analysis interview form (FAIF) and Motivation Assessment Scales (MAS) were found however with FAIF psychometric data was never collected and with MAS the psychometric data provided inconclusive and low reliability data. Upon further explorations the Questions About Behavioral Function (QABF) was developed which helped to make the gathering and analysis of data more comprehensive than previous methods, resulting in better treatments due to correct identification. When analyzed of the test-retest reliability, inter-rater reliability, and internal consistency, a consensus was found that indicated QABF as a viable measure for FA. 4. How does the Paclawskyj et al. (2000) study expand upon the Matson et al. (1999) study and why did the researchers feel this was necessary? (Extra Credit) The Paclawskyj et al. (2000) study expanded upon the stability overtime of the individual QABF items. These included Spearman rank, Pearson product–moment correlation coefficients and Cohen’s Kappa. They also wanted to substantiate the factor analysis solution brough forward by Matson et al. (1999). The researchers wanted to prove scientifically that QABF is both statistically significant and clinically meaningful when assessing functions of behavior for individuals. Since there was a lack of meaningful assessment, validating the QABF for functional assessments would champion it as a tool to be used by practitioners for easier access and more reliable results.
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