Questions about behavioral function (QABF):: A behavioral checklist for functional assessment of aberrant behavior
Introduction
Functional assessment has proven useful for identifying environmental causes of maladaptive behaviors (Sturmey, 1996). Traditionally, experimental functional analyses were used, but they have proven to be very labor intensive. As a result, researchers have been searching for more efficient means of obtaining this type of data. Various scales have been published for some time, but unfortunately no psychometric data were collected (e.g., Functional Analysis Interview Form (O’Neil et al., 1990). Conversely, the Motivation Assessment Scale (Durand & Crimmins, 1988) has been studied but the psychometric qualities have proven to be inconsistent, and generally low inter-rater and internal consistency reliability coefficients have been reported Bihm et al 1991, Crawford et al 1992, Newton and Sturmey 1991, Sigafoos et al 1994, Spreat and Connelly 1996, Zarcone et al 1991. Nonetheless, these researchers made valuable contributions by developing first attempts at time-efficient functional analysis methods.
Given the potential value of a checklist to determine behavior function, further efforts at scale development seem warranted. As a result the Questions About Behavioral Function (QABF) (Matson & Vollmer, 1995) was designed for persons with mental retardation. Maintaining variables included in this scale are social attention, escape, tangible reinforcement, physical discomfort, and nonsocial reinforcement, and constitutes a broader range of variables than previously addressed by functional analysis checklists. In particular, under-investigated variables such as social avoidance (Taylor et al., 1994) and physical discomfort Carr 1994, Lowry and Sovner 1991 are included to make the scale more comprehensive than previous instruments.
Matson et al. (1996) presented the initial psychometric data for the QABF. Data were collected at a state institution for persons with mental retardation. Participants (N = 462) ranged in age from 13–86 and were predominantly in the profound range of mental retardation. The types of behaviors assessed varied but included typical behaviors such as SIB, aggression, and property destruction. Internal reliability and validity data were assessed. Coefficient alpha and Guttman split-half reliability coefficients were very acceptable (r = 0.86 and r = 0.91, respectively). An exploratory factor analysis with varimax rotation yielded five factors accounting for 74.5% of the variance and corresponding to the five hypothesized subscales. These initial psychometric data are promising, but further data are required to substantiate that the QABF is a reliable and valid tool for functional assessment.
The QABF has also been found to be successful in identifying the function of self-injury, aggression, or stereotypies in 84% of 398 people (Matson, Bamburg, Cherry, & Paclawskyj, 1999). Further, treatments developed from the QABF identified functions, resulted in significantly more effective treatments for these problems than treatments that were not tailored to antecedent functions identified with the QABF.
In the present research, we provide a range of psychometric data for the QABF. In experiment 1 we attempted to determine the stability of the instruments across rates and over time, inter-rater and test–retest reliability were assessed. Experiment 2 was designed to substantiate the initial factor solution identified by Matson et al. (1996), a second exploratory factor analysis was conducted.
Section snippets
Subjects
Data from 34 participants were included for the test–retest portion of the study. Participants were predominantly male (82.4%) functioning in the profound range of mental retardation (76.5%). The remainder functioned in the severe range of mental retardation. Subjects’ target behaviors included self-injury, aggression, property destruction, tantrums/verbal aggression, stereotypy, pica, stealing, and elopement.
Data were collected at a large state developmental center. Data were collected as part
General discussion
There is a need for more efficient methods of conducting functional assessments, as extended functional analysis sessions are often not feasible across clinical settings Horner 1994, Van Houten and Rolider 1991. More efficient methods are required to meet the needs of service providers who do not have the resources available to conduct analog sessions, except perhaps in very extreme cases. Total administration time for each QABF was approximately 20 min, which is substantially less time than
References (20)
- et al.
Inter-rater reliability of the Motivational Assessment Scalefailure to replicate with aggressive behavior
Res Dev Disabil
(1994) - et al.
Reliability analysis of the Motivation Assessment Scalea failure to replicate
Res Dev Disabil
(1991) - et al.
Factor structure of the Motivation Assessment Scale for persons with mental retardation
Psychol Rep
(1991) Emerging themes in the functional analysis of problem behavior
J Appl Behav Anal
(1994)- et al.
A comparison of methods for the functional assessment of stereotypic behavior
JASH
(1992) - et al.
Identifying the variables maintaining self-injurious behavior
J Autism Develop Dis
(1988) Functional assessmentcontributions and future directions
J App Behav Anal
(1994)- et al.
The functional significance of problem behaviorA key to effective treatment
Habilitative Mental Healthcare Newsletter
(1991) - et al.
A validity study on the Questions About Behavioral Function (QABF) scalepredicting treatment success for self-injury, aggression, and stereotypies
Res Dev Disabil
(1999) - et al.
User’s GuideQuestions About Behavioral Function (QABF)
(1995)
Cited by (147)
Development and Implementation of a Function-Based Clinical Interview to Evaluate Childhood Behavior Problems
2023, Cognitive and Behavioral PracticeSpecific Phobias in Children and Adolescents
2022, Comprehensive Clinical Psychology, Second EditionDistress and challenging behavior in people with profound or severe intellectual disability and complex needs: Assessment of causes and evaluation of intervention outcomes
2022, International Review of Research in Developmental DisabilitiesQABF – Polish adaptation and validation of the tool for assessing the functions of challenging behaviors
2021, Research in Developmental DisabilitiesBrain injury
2020, Functional Analysis in Clinical Treatment, Second Edition