These answers draw in part from “Survey Results of Clinicians' Training, Beliefs, and Use of Assessments and Behavior-Reduction Procedures during Treatment of Problem Behavior” by Kathryn Glodowski, PhD, BCBA-D (BehaviorLive), and extend it with peer-reviewed research from our library of 27,900+ ABA research articles. Clinical framing, BACB ethics code references, and cross-links below are synthesized by Behaviorist Book Club.
View the original presentation →Functional analysis is considered the gold standard because it is the only assessment method that establishes a causal relationship between environmental variables and problem behavior through systematic experimental manipulation. By alternating between conditions that present and withhold hypothesized reinforcement contingencies, functional analysis directly demonstrates which variables maintain the behavior. This level of experimental rigor allows clinicians to select treatments that specifically address the maintaining contingencies, which research has consistently shown to produce superior outcomes compared to treatments selected without experimental functional assessment.
Clinicians most commonly cite safety concerns during assessment, insufficient training in functional analysis methodology, time and resource constraints, lack of appropriate assessment environments, and resistance from families or funding sources. Some clinicians also report believing that indirect methods provide sufficient information. Organizational factors play a significant role, as many ABA agencies do not allocate adequate time or resources for functional analysis. The practical functional analysis methodology has addressed many of these barriers by offering streamlined procedures that can be conducted in typical clinical settings with shorter durations.
A practical functional analysis is a streamlined approach that uses interview-informed, individualized test conditions rather than standardized analog conditions. Instead of running generic alone, attention, demand, and play conditions, the practical functional analysis develops test conditions based on specific environmental variables identified through caregiver interviews. This approach tends to be more ecologically valid because it mirrors the actual situations in which problem behavior occurs. It is also typically more efficient, often requiring fewer sessions and less controlled environments than traditional functional analysis, making it more feasible for outpatient and home-based settings.
Survey data generally reveals that reinforcement-based procedures such as differential reinforcement and functional communication training are the most commonly reported, consistent with the field's emphasis on least-restrictive approaches. However, response cost, overcorrection, and various forms of response interruption and redirection are also frequently reported. The use of more intensive punishment procedures varies significantly by setting, population, and organizational culture. The survey examined in this course provides updated data on these patterns, with particular attention to whether procedure selection is informed by systematic assessment.
A punisher assessment is a systematic method for evaluating potential aversive consequences to identify which ones effectively reduce behavior for a specific individual. Similar to how reinforcer assessments identify preferred stimuli, punisher assessments evaluate an individual's response to potential aversive stimuli under controlled conditions. They should be used when a clinical decision has been made that punishment procedures are necessary as part of a comprehensive treatment plan, after reinforcement-based approaches have been tried and found insufficient. Punisher assessments help ensure that the selected consequence is effective while being the least aversive option necessary.
Earlier surveys from the mid-2010s found relatively low rates of routine functional analysis use among practicing clinicians. This course examines updated survey data to determine whether utilization has increased. Several factors suggest potential improvement, including the development of more practical functional analysis methods, increased emphasis on functional analysis in graduate training programs, and growing pressure from accreditation bodies and funding sources for function-based treatment. However, the gap between research recommendations and clinical practice in this area remains a significant concern that the field continues to address.
Selecting behavior-reduction procedures without functional assessment creates several risks. The procedure may be ineffective because it does not address the actual maintaining contingency, leading to prolonged exposure to problem behavior. It may inadvertently reinforce the problem behavior if the procedure provides access to the maintaining reinforcer. It may suppress behavior without teaching an alternative, leading to response substitution where a new problem behavior emerges. It may be unnecessarily aversive if a less restrictive function-based approach would have been sufficient. Each of these risks has direct implications for client welfare and represents a departure from evidence-based practice standards.
Organizations should provide adequate time allocation for assessment within clinical schedules, training and ongoing supervision in functional analysis methodology, access to appropriate assessment environments, clear policies that establish functional analysis as the expected standard for problem behavior assessment, and administrative support for communicating assessment results to families and funding sources. Organizations should also invest in training clinicians in practical functional analysis methods that reduce logistical barriers. Leadership should model the expectation that assessment quality is not sacrificed for efficiency and should track functional analysis utilization rates as a quality metric.
The BACB Ethics Code (2022) provides several relevant provisions. Code 2.14 requires interventions based on assessment and evidence. Code 2.15 requires minimizing risk of behavior-change interventions. These codes together establish that punishment should be used only when less restrictive approaches have been adequately tried, should be selected based on assessment data rather than convenience, and should represent the minimum level of intrusiveness necessary. Additionally, Code 2.11 requires informed consent, meaning clients and families must understand the nature and rationale of any proposed punishment procedure before implementation.
Survey data provides an empirical picture of how practitioners actually behave, which may differ significantly from how the field believes or expects practitioners to behave. By identifying specific gaps between evidence-based recommendations and clinical practice, survey data can inform targeted training initiatives, guide organizational policy development, and help accreditation bodies focus their standards on areas of greatest need. Survey data can also challenge assumptions within the field and create a culture of honest self-assessment. When practitioners see data showing that their peers share similar challenges, it reduces stigma around acknowledging practice gaps and creates a foundation for collective improvement.
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Ready to go deeper? This course covers this topic with structured learning objectives and CEU credit.
Survey Results of Clinicians' Training, Beliefs, and Use of Assessments and Behavior-Reduction Procedures during Treatment of Problem Behavior — Kathryn Glodowski · 1 BACB Ethics CEUs · $19.99
Take This Course →We extended these answers with research from our library — dig into the peer-reviewed studies behind the topic, in plain-English summaries written for BCBAs.
280 research articles with practitioner takeaways
279 research articles with practitioner takeaways
252 research articles with practitioner takeaways
1 BACB Ethics CEUs · $19.99 · BehaviorLive
Research-backed educational guide with practice recommendations
Side-by-side comparison with clinical decision framework
You earn CEUs from a dozen different places. Upload any certificate — from here, your employer, conferences, wherever — and always know exactly where you stand. Learning, Ethics, Supervision, all handled.
No credit card required. Cancel anytime.
All behavior-analytic intervention is individualized. The information on this page is for educational purposes and does not constitute clinical advice. Treatment decisions should be informed by the best available published research, individualized assessment, and obtained with the informed consent of the client or their legal guardian. Behavior analysts are responsible for practicing within the boundaries of their competence and adhering to the BACB Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts.