Overview Of Descriptive Or Direct Assessment

Overviewa Descriptive Or Direct Assessment Is Sometimes Included In Th

Overviewa Descriptive Or Direct Assessment Is Sometimes Included In Th

A descriptive or direct assessment is often incorporated into a Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA). This process involves observing the target behaviors and collecting baseline data to understand their occurrence patterns. During the assessment, operational definitions of behaviors are established, and data is recorded to quantify the frequency, duration, or intensity of the behaviors. The goal is to identify potential environmental variables that correlate with the behavior, providing insights into possible functions or contingencies maintaining the behavior. Descriptive assessments encompass identifying co-occurring behaviors and stimulus changes in the environment, aligning with the scientific principle of prediction, where behaviors are understood in relation to specific antecedents and consequences.

This assignment requires conducting repeated observations of a chosen individual or character, recording the behaviors and collecting ABC (Antecedent-Behavior-Consequence) data. The ABC data are analyzed to identify environmental events associated with the behaviors, forming the basis for hypothesizing the function or reinforcement maintaining the behavior. Emphasis should be placed on compassion and cultural humility in measurement and analysis processes, ensuring ethical and respectful assessment practices.

Paper For Above instruction

Part 1: Benefits and Limitations of a Descriptive Assessment

A descriptive assessment is a scientific method used in ABA to observe and record behaviors within their natural environment without experimental manipulation. Its primary benefits include providing real-time, contextual data about behaviors and environmental variables, which helps identify potential functions of behaviors and informs intervention planning. Since it involves direct observation, it offers ecological validity, capturing behaviors as they naturally occur, leading to more accurate and relevant data for decision-making.

However, there are limitations. Descriptive assessments do not establish causal relationships; they only identify correlations between behaviors and environmental variables. Natural variability, observer bias, and environmental complexity can obscure clear interpretations. It also requires extensive observation time to gather sufficient data, which may not always be feasible. Moreover, it relies on the assumption that behaviors are stable and predictable, which may not be the case in dynamic settings.

The scientific rigor of a descriptive assessment exemplifies a level of investigation focused on description and prediction. It adheres to empirical standards by operationally defining behaviors and systematically collecting data but stops short of experimental manipulation, classifying it as a correlational or descriptive level rather than causal research.

Part 2: Obtaining Baseline Data

Using prior indirect assessments, appropriate measurement procedures such as frequency counts, duration recording, or interval recording were selected to establish baseline data for the target behaviors. For the example individual, the target behaviors included shouting and physical aggression. Baseline data were collected over multiple sessions, with each session lasting approximately 10 minutes, capturing the number of occurrences or duration of behaviors. Data were then plotted on a line graph to visually represent the frequency of these behaviors over time, providing a clear picture of their occurrence patterns.

The collected baseline data revealed that shouting occurred frequently in the mornings, often correlated with transitions and academic demands, while physical aggression appeared more sporadically but increased during times of frustration. Visual inspection of the data suggested certain environmental variables may be influencing these behaviors, such as transitions and task difficulty. This preliminary information guides subsequent assessment steps and hypothesis development regarding the behaviors’ functions.

Part 3: Collect and Analyze ABC Data

During five systematic observations, ABC data were collected by noting antecedents, behaviors, and consequences surrounding the target behaviors. For example, prior to instances of shouting, antecedents such as increased demands or changes in activity were recorded, and consequences such as administrative attention or escape from task were documented. In the case of physical aggression, antecedents included frustration with task failure, with consequences including removal from the activity or verbal reprimands.

Data analysis involved conducting contingency analysis, which examined the relationship between antecedents, behaviors, and consequences to identify patterns. A space contingency analysis was also performed to determine whether certain environments or settings were associated with increased problem behaviors. Visual displays, such as bar graphs or scatterplots, were created to illustrate the frequency and distribution of ABC sequences. These visual tools helped identify specific antecedent-behavior or behavior-consequence relationships.

Analysis revealed that shouting was frequently preceded by demand-related antecedents and reinforced by attention, supporting a possible attention-maintained function. Physical aggression was concentrated during frustration-inducing tasks, possibly serving escape or avoidance functions. The visual data confirmed the importance of environmental contingencies in influencing these behaviors, guiding targeted intervention strategies.

Part 4: Conclusion of the Descriptive Assessment

Based on the patterns and relationships observed in the ABC data, the hypothesized functions of the target behaviors are primarily attention-seeking for shouting and escape-maintained for physical aggression. The environmental contingencies such as demand-related antecedents and responses involving attention or task removal support these conclusions. Understanding these functional relationships enables the development of effective, individualized interventions that modify antecedents and consequences, promoting more adaptive behaviors.

It is essential to emphasize that the assessment’s purpose is to make predictions about the behavior's function rather than to control or change it directly. Ethical considerations, including respect and cultural humility, must guide all assessment procedures and interpretations, ensuring the dignity and relevance of the behavioral analysis for the individual and their context.

References

• Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W.. (2020). Applied Behavior Analysis (3rd ed.). Pearson.
• Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M.. (2005). The use of task analysis-based instruction in teaching individuals with autism. Journal of Behavioral Education, 14(1), 1-16.
• Miltenberger, R. G.. (2016). Behavior modification: Principles and practices (6th ed.). Cengage Learning.
• Partington, J. W., & Sundberg, M.. (1998). Teaching verbal behavior using behavioral chains. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31(2), 349-362.
• Matson, J. L., & Boisjoli, J. A.. (2009). An overview of assessment and treatment of SIB in individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 3(4), 970–979.
• O'Neill, R. E., et al. (2015). Functional assessment and program development for problem behavior. Behavior Analysts, Inc.
• LeBlanc, L. A., & Dirk, J.. (2018). Ethical considerations in behavioral assessment. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 11(2), 161-172.
• Hanley, G. P., Iwata, B. A., & McCord, B. E.. (2003). Functional analysis of problem behavior: A review. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36(2), 147-185.
• Lang, R., & Zucker, T.. (2000). Ethics and cultural humility in behavior analysis. Behavior Analyst Today, 1(2), 149-154.
• Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., & Risley, T. R.. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1(1), 91–97.