ArticleJournal of applied behavior analysis2016
Comparisons of synthesized and individual reinforcement contingencies during functional analysis.
Article in Journal of applied behavior analysis, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identifying predictive behavioral markers: A demonstration using automatically reinforced self-injurious behavior.Journal of applied behavior analysis · 2018Trial
- Human-operant evaluation of synthesized alternative reinforcement and resurgence.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2026Article
- Prevalence of Error Types of Synthesized Contingency Assessments.Behavior analysis (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Article
- Functional Analysis Decision-Making Considerations.Behavior analysis in practice · 2025Review
- I am a Behavior Analyst and an Advocate for ABA: Are you?Perspectives on behavior science · 2025Review
- Shapers at Odds: Isolation, Synthesis, and Resulting Division in the Assessment and Treatment of Problem Behavior.Perspectives on behavior science · 2025Article
- On the Evidence for Interactive Effects During and Following Synthesized Contingency Assessments.Behavioral interventions : theory & practice in residential & community-based clinical programs · 2025Article
- The Challenges Ahead: Concepts, Analytics, and Ethics of Value-Based Care in Applied Behavior Analysis.Behavior analysis in practice · 2024Review
- A Discussion of Positive Behavior Support and Applied Behavior Analysis in the Context of Autism Spectrum Disorder in the UK and Ireland.Behavior analysis in practice · 2024Review
- Toward Maximizing Assessment Efficiency: A Synthesized Trial-Based Functional Analysis and Competing Stimulus Assessment.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- On the Reliability and Treatment Utility of the Practical Functional Assessment Process.Behavior analysis in practice · 2022Article
- Conducting Translational Research in the Context of Patient Care.Perspectives on behavior science · 2022Article
- An Evaluation of "Balance": a Home-Based, Parent-Implemented Program Addressing Emerging Problem Behavior.Behavior analysis in practice · 2021Article
- A Preliminary Evaluation of Interrater Reliability and Concurrent Validity of Open-Ended Indirect Assessment.Behavior analysis in practice · 2020Article
- On the Standardization of the Functional Analysis.Behavior analysis in practice · 2020Article
- Resurgence following differential reinforcement of alternative behavior implemented with and without extinction.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2020Article
- Interview-Informed Synthesized Contingency Analysis (IISCA): Novel Interpretations and Future Directions.Behavior analysis in practice · 2020Article
- A translational evaluation of potential iatrogenic effects of single and combined contingencies during functional analysis.Journal of applied behavior analysis · 2020Article
- Comparisons of standardized and interview-informed synthesized reinforcement contingencies relative to functional analysis.Journal of applied behavior analysis · 2020Article
- Efficiency in functional analysis of problem behavior: A quantitative and qualitative review.Journal of applied behavior analysis · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Researchers typically modify individual functional analysis (FA) conditions after results are inconclusive (Hanley, Iwata, & McCord, 2003). Hanley, Jin, Vanselow, and Hanratty (2014) introduced a marked departure from this practice, using an interview-informed synthesized contingency analysis (IISCA). In the test condition, they delivered multiple contingencies simultaneously (e.g., attention and escape) after each occurrence of problem behavior; in the control condition, they delivered those same reinforcers noncontingently and continuously. In the current investigation, we compared the results of the IISCA with a more traditional FA in which we evaluated each putative reinforcer individually. Four of 5 participants displayed destructive behavior that was sensitive to the individual contingencies evaluated in the traditional FA. By contrast, none of the participants showed a response pattern consistent with the assumption of the IISCA. We discuss the implications of these findings on the development of accurate and efficient functional analyses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.