Trial-Based Functional Analysis: Implications of Criterion-Based Decision-Making

The trial-based functional analysis (TBFA) is commonly used to evaluate environmental variables maintaining challenging behavior in a naturalistic environment. Several criterion-based approaches have been developed to support data-based decision-making during the TBFA, including trial-based ongoing visual inspection (TB-OVI) and a binomial distribution (BD) approach. The current study compared four analytic strategies applied to existing clinical TBFA data as a retrospective concordance analysis: traditional aggregated data visual analysis, TB-OVI, BD, and a modified BD of valid demonstrations of effect (BD-VDE). The BD-VDE model specifies the test–control segment as the primary unit of analysis rather than the individual trial. We additionally identify and correct a computational issue in the published BD procedure by using the cumulative upper-tail probability when evaluating a criterion. Therefore, the BD-VDE is presented as a novel analytical model rather than a computational variant of the existing criteria, and it represents the paired format of the TBFA. Across eight TBFA datasets, we compared function classifications and criterion-referenced decision points. The three criterion-based methods produced identical classifications across all participants, settings, and condition combinations, although the number of segments required to reach a criterion differed across methods. Latency data additionally demonstrated variability in response patterns across participants, conditions, and settings, which was not represented by binary classifications alone. Because the present study did not include an independent criterion for behavioral function or treatment validation, the outcomes of this study do not establish accuracy or clinical validity. Thus, we present the BD-VDE as a proof-of-concept requiring empirical evaluation. The implications of these analyses may provide a better understanding of the different variables to consider when using criterion-based measures for data-based decision-making in the TBFA.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Behavioral Sciences
Published
2026-11-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/bs16112101
Primary Topic
Behavioral and Psychological Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Trial-Based Functional Analysis: Implications of Criterion-Based Decision-Making

Manish Kumar Goyal, Lesley A. Shawler, Michael Horton
Behavioral Sciences
Behavioral and Psychological Studies
article

Trial-Based Functional Analysis: Implications of Criterion-Based Decision-Making

Manish Kumar Goyal, Lesley A. Shawler, Michael Horton
article en

Abstract

The trial-based functional analysis (TBFA) is commonly used to evaluate environmental variables maintaining challenging behavior in a naturalistic environment. Several criterion-based approaches have been developed to support data-based decision-making during the TBFA, including trial-based ongoing visual inspection (TB-OVI) and a binomial distribution (BD) approach. The current study compared four analytic strategies applied to existing clinical TBFA data as a retrospective concordance analysis: traditional aggregated data visual analysis, TB-OVI, BD, and a modified BD of valid demonstrations of effect (BD-VDE). The BD-VDE model specifies the test–control segment as the primary unit of analysis rather than the individual trial. We additionally identify and correct a computational issue in the published BD procedure by using the cumulative upper-tail probability when evaluating a criterion. Therefore, the BD-VDE is presented as a novel analytical model rather than a computational variant of the existing criteria, and it represents the paired format of the TBFA. Across eight TBFA datasets, we compared function classifications and criterion-referenced decision points. The three criterion-based methods produced identical classifications across all participants, settings, and condition combinations, although the number of segments required to reach a criterion differed across methods. Latency data additionally demonstrated variability in response patterns across participants, conditions, and settings, which was not represented by binary classifications alone. Because the present study did not include an independent criterion for behavioral function or treatment validation, the outcomes of this study do not establish accuracy or clinical validity. Thus, we present the BD-VDE as a proof-of-concept requiring empirical evaluation. The implications of these analyses may provide a better understanding of the different variables to consider when using criterion-based measures for data-based decision-making in the TBFA.

Behavioral SciencesVol. 16(11)
Southern Illinois University Carbondale (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Behavioral and Psychological Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon