ArticleBehavior analysis in practice2020
On the Standardization of the Functional Analysis.
Article in Behavior analysis in practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Potential Evocative Effect of Leisure Item Omission in the Attention and Escape Conditions of a Functional Analysis.Behavior analysis in practice · 2026Article
- How to Conduct More Culturally Responsive and Trauma-Informed Functional Assessment Interviews: A Tutorial.Behavior analysis in practice · 2025Article
- Shapers at Odds: Isolation, Synthesis, and Resulting Division in the Assessment and Treatment of Problem Behavior.Perspectives on behavior science · 2025Article
- Are Function-Based Interventions for Students with Emotional/Behavioral Disorders Trauma Informed? A Systematic Review.Behavior analysis in practice · 2024Article
- A Two Step Validation of the Performance-Based IISCA: A Trauma-Informed Functional Analysis Model.Behavior analysis in practice · 2024Article
- Functional analysis: what have we learned in 85 years?Postepy psychiatrii neurologii · 2023Review
- Contingent Electric Skin Shock: An Empirical or Ideological Issue?Perspectives on behavior science · 2023Article
- A Predictive Multimodal Framework to Alert Caregivers of Problem Behaviors for Children with ASD (PreMAC).Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The functional analysis procedures described in the seminal Iwata et al. (1982/1994) study are prominent in the applied behavior analytic literature, having been replicated hundreds of times over the past 30 years (Beavers, Iwata, & Lerman, 2013; Hanley, McCord, Iwata, 2003). However, the extent to which particular components of this functional analysis model have become more or less prominent over time is not clear from these literature reviews. We therefore conducted a review of the functional analysis literature between the years of 1965 and 2016 to determine the trends in the usage of particular components over time and to determine if the published literature reflects a standardization of the manner in which functional analyses of problem behavior are conducted. Furthermore, we discuss whether or not this standardization of a functional analysis model is currently necessary.
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.