Retrospective analysis of changes in response topographies of escape‐maintained aggressive behavior during functional analyses

Hernández et al. (2018) looked back at old FA data. They wanted to see how the shapes of escape-maintained aggression changed across demand sessions.

They counted each separate form of aggression. Then they compared the first demand session to the last one for each person.

Most topographies dropped off. One strong form stayed while the others faded.

The total number of aggressive acts went down from start to finish.

Hattier et al. (2011) found that 87% of "multiple control" FAs used lumped data. When you lump, you can miss that some topographies are already gone. Hernández shows the fade in real time.

Guerrero et al. (2022) proved that eye-balling the graph beats strict rules for mealtime FAs. Hernández gives one more reason to watch each line: one topography may be doing all the work.

Fernandez et al. (2024) saw rare acquisition in escape sessions. Hernández adds that even without new behavior, the mix you see on day one is not the mix you get later.

Stop treating "aggression" as one number. Track each hit, bite, and kick on its own data path. When one form stays high and the rest drop, you know exactly what to block or teach as replacement. You will write clearer treatment plans and avoid blaming the wrong topography for escape.