Effectiveness and Social Validity of FBAs for Youth At-Risk or With High Incidence Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis

J. Maag
{"title":"Effectiveness and Social Validity of FBAs for Youth At-Risk or With High Incidence Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis","authors":"J. Maag","doi":"10.5539/JEDP.V9N1P41","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This meta-analysis examined the effectiveness and social validity of 44 functional behavioral assessment (FBA) studies using single case research designs (SCRDs) conducted with youth displaying challenging behaviors or had high incidence disabilities. Three effect sizes were calculated: standard mean difference (SMD), Tau-U, and improvement rate difference (IRD). Fisher’s conservative dual criterion (CDC), which is a statistical aid to visual analysis, was also applied. Social validity was assessed by using indicators described by Kazdin (2010). Effect sizes were in ranges indicating moderate to large effects. Approximately 71% of AB contrasts reflected CDC systematic change. However, only 44% of studies assessed social validity. There were no significant differences in effectiveness of interventions whether or not a functional analysis was conducted nor whether the controlling function was escape or attention. Results are discussed in terms of FBA implementation issues related to social validity and the necessity for conducting a functional analysis for these youth.","PeriodicalId":90589,"journal":{"name":"Journal of educational and developmental psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of educational and developmental psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5539/JEDP.V9N1P41","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This meta-analysis examined the effectiveness and social validity of 44 functional behavioral assessment (FBA) studies using single case research designs (SCRDs) conducted with youth displaying challenging behaviors or had high incidence disabilities. Three effect sizes were calculated: standard mean difference (SMD), Tau-U, and improvement rate difference (IRD). Fisher’s conservative dual criterion (CDC), which is a statistical aid to visual analysis, was also applied. Social validity was assessed by using indicators described by Kazdin (2010). Effect sizes were in ranges indicating moderate to large effects. Approximately 71% of AB contrasts reflected CDC systematic change. However, only 44% of studies assessed social validity. There were no significant differences in effectiveness of interventions whether or not a functional analysis was conducted nor whether the controlling function was escape or attention. Results are discussed in terms of FBA implementation issues related to social validity and the necessity for conducting a functional analysis for these youth.
对高风险或高致残青少年的FBAs有效性与社会效度:一项元分析
本荟萃分析考察了44项功能行为评估(FBA)研究的有效性和社会效度,这些研究采用单案例研究设计(SCRDs)对表现出挑战性行为或高发病率残疾的青少年进行了研究。计算三个效应量:标准平均差(SMD)、Tau-U和改良率差(IRD)。Fisher的保守双重标准(CDC),这是一个统计辅助视觉分析,也被应用。社会效度的评估采用Kazdin(2010)描述的指标。效应大小的范围表明中等到较大的影响。约71%的AB对比反映了CDC的系统性改变。然而,只有44%的研究评估了社会效度。无论是否进行功能分析,也无论控制功能是逃避还是注意,干预措施的有效性都没有显著差异。结果讨论了与社会效度相关的FBA实施问题,以及对这些青少年进行功能分析的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书