DESCRIPTIVE AND EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSES OF VARIABLES MAINTAINING SELF‐INJURIOUS BEHAVIOR

TLDR

The study compared descriptive and experimental analyses to assess whether both methods identify similar variables maintaining self‑injurious behavior in six subjects. Subjects were observed in natural settings and in a day program where functional analyses manipulated potential maintaining variables, and conditional probability analyses identified antecedent and consequent events linked to SIB. Descriptive analysis accurately identified social versus nonsocial contingencies for SIB but could not differentiate between positive and negative reinforcement, unlike the experimental analysis.

Abstract

Independent descriptive (correlational) and functional (experimental) analyses were conducted to determine the extent to which the two methods would yield data supporting similar conclusions about variables maintaining the self‐injurious behavior (SIB) of 6 subjects. For the descriptive analyses, subjects were observed in their residences and at training sites at various times each day while observers recorded naturally occurring sequences of specified subject and staff behaviors. The subjects also participated in a day program for the assessment and treatment of SIB, in which they were exposed to functional analyses that manipulated potential maintaining variables in multielement designs. Both sets of data were analyzed via conditional probabilities to identify relevant antecedent and consequent events for subjects' SIB. Using outcomes of the experimental analysis as the standard for comparison, results indicated that the descriptive analysis was useful in identifying the extent to which SIB was related to social versus nonsocial contingencies, but was limited in its ability to distinguish between positive and negative reinforcement (i.e., attention versus escape).