Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T05:14:14.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Researching Functional Relations in Behaviour Analysis and Therapy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 October 2014

Lucius Arco
Lucius Arco*
Affiliation:
Authority for Intellectually Handicapped Persons, Western Australia
*
Authority for Intellectually Handicapped Persons, South West Metropolitan Region, P. O. Box 912, Fremantle W.A. 6160
Get access

Abstract

Behaviour analysis and therapy is based on the investigation of functional relations between behaviour and its controlling variables. This article focuses on the description of the functional relation and methods used for its research. In particular it presents unpublished data to illustrate how the continuous measurement of independent variables aids the identification of functional relations, research into generalization (a major problem area in behaviour analysis and therapy) and the development of parametric analyses. The implications of comprehensive functional analyses are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Behaviour Change , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , September 1987 , pp. 33 - 40
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Agras, W. S., & Berkowitz, R. (1980). Clinical research in behavior therapy: Halfway there? Behavior Therapy, 11, 472–487.Google Scholar
Arco, L., Mitchell, G., & Copeland, D. (1983). “A quantitative examination of the functional relationship between child behaviours and contingent parental attention in parent training”. Paper presented at the sixth conference of the Australian Behaviour Modification Association, Adelaide, South Australia.Google Scholar
Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., & Risley, T. R. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 91–97.Google Scholar
Baer, R. A., Williams, J. A., Osnes, P. G., & Stokes, T. F. (1984). Delayed reinforcement as an indiscriminable contingency in verbal/ nonverbal correspondence training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 429–440.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berler, E. S., Gross, A. M., & Drabman, R. S. (1982). Social skills training with children: Proceed with caution. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 15, 41–53.Google Scholar
Birnbrauer, J. S. (1981). External validity and experimental investigation of individual behavior. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 1, 117–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birnbrauer, J. S. (1985). When social reinforcement fails. Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Conference of the Australian Behaviour Modification Association (pp. 287–296). Melbourne.Google Scholar
Hayes, S. C., Rincover, A., & Solnick, J. V. (1980). The technical drift of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 275–285.Google Scholar
Hersen, M., & Barlow, D. H. (1976). Single case experimental designs: Strategies for studying behavior change. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Johnston, J. M., & Pennypacker, H. S. (1980). Strategies and tactics of human behavioral research. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
McDowell, J. J. (1982). The importance of Herrnstein's mathematical statement of the law of effect for behavior therapy. American Psychologist, 37, 771–779.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Myerson, J., & Hale, S. (1984). Practical implications of the matching law. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 367–380.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peterson, L., Homer, A. L., & Wonderlich, S. A. (1982). The integrity of independent variables in behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 15, 477–492.Google Scholar
Ralph, A., & Birnbrauer, J. S. (1985). A task analytic approach to generalization: An alternative to behavioural alchemy. Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Conference of the Australian Behaviour Modification Association (pp. 417–426). Melbourne.Google Scholar
Salend, S. J. (1984). Therapy outcome research: Threats to treatment integrity. Behavior Modification, 8, 211–222.Google Scholar
Sanders, M. R. (1984). Clinical strategies for enhancing generalization in behavioural parent training: An overview. Behaviour Change, 1, 25–35.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B., & Lacey, H. (1982). Behaviorism, science and human nature. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Scott, R. R., Himadi, W., & Keane, T. M. (1983). A review of generalization in social skills training: Suggestions for future research. In Hersen, M., Eisler, R. M. & Miller, P. M. (eds), Progress in behavior modification, Vol. 15. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Skinner, B. F. (1966). What is the experimental analysis of behavior? Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 9, 213–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stokes, T. F., & Baer, D. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 349–367.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stokes, T. F., & Osnes, P. G. (in press). Programming the generalization of children's social behavior. In Strain, P. S., Guralnick, M. J., & Walker, H. (eds), Children's social behavior: Development, assessment and modification. Orlando, FL: Wiley.Google Scholar