A Survey of Expert Decision‐Making in Functional Analysis Methodology
Expert analysts say treat FA choice like a menu, not a script—pick the format that fits the context and safety limits.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Hoffmann et al. (2025) asked 15 FA experts how they pick a functional analysis format.
The team used an online survey with open-ended questions and ranking tasks.
Experts compared 11 FA types, from standard multi-element to brief and interview-informed versions.
What they found
No single FA format won top marks in every situation.
Experts said weigh safety, time, and resources before you choose.
They told practitioners to keep several FA tools in the kit, not just the classic one.
How this fits with other research
Jessel et al. (2020) showed that cutting a 10-min IISCA to 3-5 min weakens control. Hoffmann’s experts echo the warning: brief is fine, but only if you keep the full time window.
Oropeza et al. (2018) proved that protective gear does not change FA results. Hoffmann’s panel lists safety gear as a key factor when picking any FA format.
Suhrheinrich et al. (2020) validated a 3-point fidelity checklist for busy community staff. Hoffmann’s survey pushes the same idea: choose the simplest FA that still gives clear data.
Why it matters
Stop defaulting to the standard four-condition FA. Match the method to the setting, the risks, and the time you have. If you run a brief FA, keep the full session length that Jessel showed works. If aggression is likely, suit up—Oropeza showed the gear won’t skew results. Pick the leanest tool that still gives an answer, just like Suhrheinrich did with fidelity checks.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →List your next three clients, note their safety and time constraints, and pick a different FA format for each one instead of using the same template.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
ABSTRACT Applied behavior analysis (ABA) relies on functional behavior assessments (FBAs) like functional analysis (FA) to address challenging behaviors effectively. FA, the most rigorous FBA method, accurately identifies underlying functional variables, guiding targeted interventions. Despite FA's proven efficacy, its integration into ABA practice is limited. This inconsistency may stem from inadequate training on FA methodologies' strengths and limitations. This study surveyed recognized FA experts to identify their recommendations for selecting FA methods. Fifteen experts participated, sharing insights on backgrounds, training needs, and decision‐making criteria across 11 FA variations. Experts emphasized considering multiple FA methodologies and offered detailed considerations for practitioners selecting FA types as part of the FA process. Their insights have the potential to inform practitioner decision‐making based on expert input.
Behavioral Interventions, 2025 · doi:10.1002/bin.70045