↓ Skip to main content

Functional Assessment of Problem Behavior: Dispelling Myths, Overcoming Implementation Obstacles, and Developing New Lore

Overview of attention for article published in Behavior Analysis in Practice, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#26 of 589)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
33 X users
facebook
19 Facebook pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
276 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
261 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Functional Assessment of Problem Behavior: Dispelling Myths, Overcoming Implementation Obstacles, and Developing New Lore
Published in
Behavior Analysis in Practice, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/bf03391818
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gregory P. Hanley

Abstract

Hundreds of studies have shown the efficacy of treatments for problem behavior based on an understanding of its function. Assertions regarding the legitimacy of different types of functional assessment vary substantially across published articles, and best practices regarding the functional assessment process are sometimes difficult to cull from the empirical literature or from published discussions of the behavioral assessment process. A number of myths regarding the functional assessment process, which appear to be pervasive within different behavior-analytic research and practice communities, will be reviewed in the context of an attempt to develop new lore regarding the functional assessment process. Frequently described obstacles to implementing a critical aspect of the functional assessment process, the functional analysis, will be reviewed in the context of solutions for overcoming them. Finally, the aspects of the functional assessment process that should be exported to others versus those features that should remain the sole technological property of behavior analysts will be discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 261 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 257 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 72 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 29 11%
Student > Bachelor 18 7%
Other 14 5%
Other 46 18%
Unknown 50 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 139 53%
Social Sciences 39 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 3%
Arts and Humanities 5 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 2%
Other 11 4%
Unknown 56 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 June 2020.
All research outputs
#1,114,540
of 24,174,783 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Analysis in Practice
#26
of 589 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,132
of 320,257 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Analysis in Practice
#5
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,174,783 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 589 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 320,257 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.