Efficiency in functional analysis of problem behavior: A quantitative and qualitative review

Saini et al. (2020) read every efficiency study on functional analysis they could find. They pulled out numbers on how long each format took and how many sessions it needed.

They compared trial-based, brief, multielement, and synthesized contingency designs side-by-side.

The winners for clock time were trial-based and synthesized contingency FAs. They needed the fewest minutes to show you the function.

Multielement and synthesized contingency tied for session count. Both wrapped up in about the same number of visits.

Webb et al. (1999) already showed brief FAs could match long ones in under one-fifth of the time. The new review keeps brief on the map but bumps trial-based and synthesized designs to the top speed slot.

Kahng et al. (1999) warned that brief FAs only matched full results two-thirds of the time. Saini’s team still lists brief as an option, but they quietly rank it behind trial-based and synthesized contingency for pure speed.

Jessel et al. (2020) gave real-world proof that 3-minute sessions work. That backs up the review’s praise for super-short formats.

If your clinic calendar is packed, pick trial-based or synthesized contingency FAs. You will shave minutes off each session and still get a clear answer. Keep 3-minute sessions in your pocket as a ready-made way to hit that speed target.