The study written by Davis, Kahng, Schmidt, Bowman and Boelter (2012) replicated and extended the procedures of previous research, by Kanhg, Abt, and Schonbachler (2001), by examining ten individuals who engage in low rate, high-intensity problem behavior (Davis et al., 2012). The study included ten participants initially, but only contains findings from six individuals who showed clear responding in the modified functional analysis (Davis et al., 2012). The six participants included five males and one female, ranging from 10 to 19 years of age (Davis et al., 2012). The participants in this study had a wide range of disabilities from autism, intellectual disabilities, disruptive behavior disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder (Davis et al., 2012).
The functional
…show more content…
There are limitations of this study that can be unable to address in future research. (a) The standard functional analyses always preceded the modified functional analysis. (b) The number of resources needed to conduct the modified functional analysis. Each modified condition required at least 1:1 supervisions, as well as observers. Future research can address the following limitations. (a) The length of deprivation within sessions for the participants in the modified functional analysis. Practitioners should consider the extended duration of conducting modified functional analysis, as clear behavioral function could be determined with shorter sessions (Davis et al., 2012). (b) Future research should consider that modified functional analysis can be easier to implement in participants natural setting because the activities can be done throughout the day (Davis et al., 2012). (c) Lastly, practitioners should consider the appropriateness of conducting a modified functional analysis when a standard functional analysis fails to isolate reinforcing contingencies for individuals who omit low rate, high-intensity problem behavior (Davis et al.,