The Effect of the Extinction Procedure in Function-Based Intervention
Janney, Donna M.; Umbreit, John; Ferro, Jolenea B.; Liaupsin, Carl J.; Lane, Kathleen L. (2013). Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, v15 n2 p113-123. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1010888
-
examining3Students, grades1-3
Functional Behavioral Assessment-based Interventions Intervention Report
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2016
- Single Case Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Functional Behavioral Assessment-based Interventions.
Findings
To view more detailed information about the study findings from this review, please see Functional Behavioral Assessment-based Interventions Intervention Report (977 KB)
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Male: 100% -
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
West
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in general education classrooms in one elementary school in the southwestern United States.
Study sample
The study sample included three male students, Hugo, Tomas, and Eric, all of whom were at risk for an emotional and behavioral disorder and below average in academic competence. Their teachers had sought help from the school’s student behavior intervention team because of the students’ behavior and academic problems. Hugo was 6 years old and in the first grade. Tomas was 7 years old and in the second grade. Eric was 8 years old and in the third grade.
Intervention
Functional behavioral assessment (FBA) procedures included reviews of student records, interviews with teachers and students, and direct observations. Results of the FBA suggested that Hugo displayed off-task behavior to obtain attention from his teacher. Tomas displayed off-task behavior when having difficulty with academic tasks; teacher and peer attention reinforced his off-task behavior. Eric engaged in off-task behavior during writing activities, especially when he was having difficulty; his off-task behavior was reinforced when he did not have to finish the task and when he received teacher attention. Each student had slightly different intervention features. Hugo’s FBA-based intervention included sitting close to the teacher, providing teacher attention if he was on task for 1 minute or longer, and redirecting off-task behavior once and then ignoring subsequent problem behaviors (referred to as extinction). Tomas’s FBA-based intervention included using clear verbal instructions for transition behavior, providing teacher attention if he was on task for 1 minute or longer, and redirecting problem behavior once and then ignoring subsequent problem behaviors. For Eric, the FBA-based intervention involved sitting close to the teacher, offering small group instruction and shortened assignments, providing teacher attention if he was on task for 1 minute or longer, and redirecting behavior once and then ignoring subsequent off-task behaviors, as well as maintaining the given task until it was completed. The WWC visual analyses for each student focuses only on the initial ABAB phases of the reversal/withdrawal design, which compared the baseline condition to the full FBA-based intervention, including the extinction procedure. However, the study also compared the FBA-based intervention to a partial intervention phase, without extinction. This comparison is not of interest for this review because it does not compare the effect of an FBA-based intervention to a non-FBA-based intervention.
Comparison
The study used a reversal-withdrawal design for all three students. The baseline/withdrawal condition consisted of normal practices in each classroom.
Support for implementation
The research team gave teachers daily feedback on their implementation of the intervention. The primary observer also gave the teacher a signal to indicate that it was time for the teacher to give reinforcement for on-task behavior.
Additional Sources
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
-
Janney, D. M. (2009). A component analysis of function-based intervention: the role of the extinction procedure. (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3352975)
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).