Abstract
Special educators are often considered the experts in their school when it comes to developing functional behavior assessments (FBA) and behavior intervention plans (BIP), yet rarely are they trained much beyond basic antecedents, behaviors, and consequences (ABC). This column discusses concepts that will expand special education professionals’ knowledge to make better decisions regarding interventions for the students they serve. Specifically, the focus is on motivating operations (MO) and function-based interventions and the implications of these on behavior. Knowledge of the concept of MOs can enhance a teacher’s ability to provide evidence-based interventions and more fully developed behavioral interventions for students in their purview.
Keywords
Individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), emotional behavior disorders (EBD), intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD), and students with challenging behavior in general can often engage in high rates of these behaviors (Koegel et al., 1995). This column discusses concepts that will expand special education professionals’ knowledge to enhance the process of making better decisions regarding interventions for the students they serve who display these challenging behaviors. Although the topography, or the detailed description of a behavior, often varies across individuals, the purpose is determined to be one of the four specific reasons, also known as functions. The specified functions include (a) access to an item or activity, (b) attention from others, (c) escape from a task or attention, or (d) automatic reinforcement (i.e., engaging in the behavior is reinforcing in itself). Determining which function is reinforcing (i.e., keeps the challenging behavior occurring) gives educators insight on how to more effectively intervene to decrease the targeted behavior. Identifying the maintaining behavioral function (e.g., access, attention, escape, or automatic) will guide the teacher in developing interventions that pinpoint and reinforce socially appropriate replacement behaviors that are more effective in getting the student’s needs met.
Simultaneously, the problem behaviors are put on extinction, meaning they are no longer reinforced. When the teacher understands why the individual is engaging in a challenging behavior (i.e., function) and the value of engaging in that behavior at that time (i.e., motivating operation [MO]), the teacher can teach the socially appropriate behavior as a functional replacement. For instance, if an individual is hitting others to gain access to attention and attention is highly valued at that time, teaching the student to ask questions, tell jokes, or simply say, “Look at me,” are all function-based and more appropriate ways to receive attention from others than slapping, pushing, or kicking. Effectively determining the function of the behavior is essential to developing interventions that lead to long-term positive educational, behavioral, and social outcomes (Carbone et al., 2007). As another example, if a student engages in a challenging behavior when presented with an academic activity (i.e., ripping up the paper), the pattern indicates that the student is attempting to escape the task.
Presenting the academic activity in smaller increments with access to a reward (i.e., using positive teacher attention, for instance, followed by time on the computer when finished) teaches an alternative appropriate behavior based on the hypothesized function. The smaller increments can be increased as the student becomes more likely to engage in the activity without challenging behavior. If a student engages in a challenging behavior across multiple settings (i.e., self-vocalizations or hand flapping) without regard to time or environmental surroundings, this pattern indicates that the behavior itself is reinforcing (i.e., automatic).
Determining Behavioral Functions
The functional behavior assessment (FBA) is a key component for developing the behavior intervention plan (BIP) as well as subsequent individualized educational program (IEP) behavioral goals and objectives. Most special educators are familiar with the three-term contingency of challenging behavior that focuses on the antecedent, behavior, and consequence (ABC). Special education teachers also understand the importance of determining behavioral functions when developing effective BIPs. However, beyond understanding the basics, having advanced knowledge about MOs can help educators expand their assessment capabilities. This is especially true when the same antecedent results in different behaviors and consequences. MOs add to understanding why behaviors occur and can be important to developing successful function-based interventions (Cipani, 2018; Cooper et al., 2020).
Functional Behavior Assessment
In conducting an FBA, one of the first investigations should be a records review to eliminate any medical concerns as causes of the problem behavior. Other indirect methods of assessment typically include the use of interviews and questionnaires conducted with parents and individuals who work with the student. Using the gathered information, educators can then operationally define the problem behavior. The definition must include concrete examples of what the behavior looks like and nonexamples of the behavior if appropriate. In addition, behaviors should be defined in such a way that two or more teachers looking at the same instance of behavior would be able to come to an agreement on whether or not they are viewing a defined behavior. For example, aggression might be defined as kicking, slapping, or punching an individual no matter the force but does not include high fives or fist bumps. From there, the teacher can closely monitor the student for the ABCs, noting the antecedents (i.e., what occurs immediately before the behavior), the problem behaviors (e.g., aggression), and the consequences (i.e., what happens after the behavior). Data for ABCs are collected using forms that can be constructed by the teacher or provided by other professionals. See Figure 1 for an example of an ABC data collection form. These ABC data allow educators the opportunity to observe any possible patterns across time, which may determine a hypothesized function for the problem behavior.
ABC (antecedent, behavior, consequence) form.
Functional Analysis
Funcational analysis can be a part of the FBA process and should be conducted by a trained professional such as a board-certified behavior analyst (i.e., BCBA), especially when it is challenging to determine the function of a behavior. As defined by Cooper et al. (2020), an FA is a manipulation of events (i.e., antecedents and consequences) arranged into four separate conditions (e.g., contingent escape condition, contingent attention condition, and alone condition as test conditions, and a control condition where reinforcement is readily available with no demands placed on the student). The FA is conducted to determine the function of a problem behavior. By purposefully arranging the antecedents and consequences, problem behavior can be observed and measured according to the specific contingencies contrived by the assessor. For example, in the alone or no interaction condition, the student is given no attention or access to any items and may engage in the problem behavior at will. During the attention condition, teacher or peer attention is provided as soon as the problem behavior occurs. The control condition allows the individual to engage in a highly preferred activity while simultaneously receiving attention on a thick schedule (e.g., every 30 s). In the escape condition, demands are removed as soon as the problem behavior occurs (e.g., 30-s break and then return to tasks). See Iwata and Dozier (2008) for further information on FAs.
During each condition, the number of times the child engaged in problem behavior is counted and then graphed. Due to the technical requirements for conducting the FA, teachers should consult a BCBA if an FA is needed (Applied Behavioral Strategies, 2012; Cipani, 2018; Cooper et al., 2020). Once graphed, the function should be evident as the behavior will have occurred more frequently in the contrived condition that reinforces the problem behavior as compared with the other conditions. If there are more than two functions that are high above the control condition, there is a chance that the behavior serves more than one function. High rates of the target behavior across conditions, including control condition, often indicate an automatically reinforced behavior.
Initially, the FA may seem somewhat counterintuitive to educators as the problem behavior is purposely reinforced; however, this is the prescribed intention of the assessment. The more frequent the occurrence of the behavior during a specified reinforcement condition, the higher the likelihood that the behavior is maintained by that specific reinforcement contingency. This process is meant only for the assessment of function and not as an intervention. An FA is a great tool for determining why the behavior is occurring and leads to function-based interventions. It should be noted that the FA may result in an increase in problem behavior in some or all conditions. Due to this, some administrators are hesitant to allow FAs to be conducted in school, and these should only be conducted by qualified personnel, such as a BCBA.
Beyond the Three-Term Contingency
Motivating Operations
Motivating operations are variables that should be considered in addition to the three-term contingency (ABC) as they alter the value of a consequence and the dimension or performance of an individual’s behavior (Ivy et al., 2016; Michael, 1982). For example, when determining that a student engages in aggression to gain access to a food item, logically, the level of hunger the student experiences would influence the motivation to gain access to food. In essence, the student will be less likely to engage in the aggression after a meal. Conversely, going for a prolonged period of time without access to food may effectively increase the motivation to gain access to food (i.e., a powerful reinforcer when an individual is hungry) and thus behave aggressively. While MOs cannot be seen observably and measurably, their impact on behavior can be observed and measured. The occurrence of the behavior may alter based on changes in the value of the reinforcing consequence. In the sequence of ABCs, MOs precede the three-term contingency, thereby creating a four-term contingency. The MO refers to a condition or event that momentarily alters the value of reinforcement. Behaviors associated with an MO are more likely to occur when the value of that condition is high, that is, how much you want something and how hard you will work for it (Langthorne & McGill, 2009; Michael, 1982).
Motivating operations are not to be confused with setting events. These terms are erroneously used interchangeably and require further clarification. While MOs and setting events occur before the behavior occurs, setting events are broader concepts than MOs and include things like health and fitness, relationships with others/behavioral history (Nosik & Carr, 2015). MOs are more immediate, change the value of the response, for instance, if a person walks by a candy machine and would like to get a piece of candy, their motivation to find coins all of a sudden increases, whereas prior to seeing the vending machine, there was no purpose to seek for coins (Michael, 2007; Nosik & Carr, 2015).
Establishing operations and abolishing operations
There are two main types of MOs, including establishing operations (EO) and abolishing operations (AO). Establishing operations alter behavior by increasing reinforcer effectiveness in force or intensity while also increasing the dimension (e.g., frequency, rate, magnitude, latency, or duration) of how the student will respond. The AO decreases reinforcer effectiveness in force or intensity, therefore lowering the dimension of how the student will respond (Cooper et al., 2020; Ivy et al., 2016; McGinnis et al., 2010; Michael, 1982). For example, if a student engages in self-injurious behavior to access attention from the teacher, an EO occurs when the student has gone a prolonged period of time without attention. The lack of attention from the teacher will increase the value of (i.e., desire for) attention causing the student to attempt to gain that attention by engaging in self-injury. However, if the teacher provides attention to the student every 3 min, an AO occurs because the student has frequent access to teacher attention and does not need to engage in self-injury for attention. Understanding MOs, specifically EOs and AOs, strengthens a teacher’s ability to determine the function and the magnitude of target behaviors, especially when there are inconsistencies using the three-term contingency that may prevent intervention precision for BIPs. Table 1 describes additional examples using the four-term contingency model.
The Four-Term Contingency Model.
Note. MO = motivating operation; EO = establishing operation; AO = abolishing operation; DTT = discrete trial teaching.
Conclusion
Many special education professionals are responsible for providing individualized instruction for students with disabilities based on the mandates of Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (2013) outlined in the IEP. This requires skills that include assessing academic and behavioral outcomes and developing interventions to teach skills with a goal of improvement toward grade or level of performance. With regard to behavior, the special educator is often called to provide expertise and guidance. For determining why students display certain problem behaviors, an understanding beyond the basic three-term contingency (ABC) can help in the development of effective FBAs and BIPs. Incorporating MOs as part of an expanded four-term contingency may provide enhanced teacher proficiency and enhance student success.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.