This study evaluated the intrarater reliability of two functional behavior assessment rating scales: the Motivation Assessment Scale and the Problem Behavior Questionnaire. Teachers rated 30 students from 10 self-contained classrooms for students with emotional or behavioral disorders on three separate occasions using both rating scales. Pearson correlation coefficients and exact and adjacent agreement percentages indicated variable and inconsistent ratings across administrations and rating scales. The authors discuss possible reasons for inconsistencies, as well as implications for practice and future research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArmstrongS. W., & KauffmanJ. M. (1999). Functional behavioral assessment: Introduction to the series.Behavioral Disorders, 24, 167–168.
2.
CampbellD. T., & StanleyJ. C. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
3.
CarrE. G., & DurandV. M. (1985). Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training.Journal of Behavioral Education, 18, 111–126.
4.
Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice. (1998a). Addressing student problem behavior: An IEP team's introduction to functional behavioral assessment and behavior intervention plans (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
5.
Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice. (1998b). Addressing student problem behavior—Part II: Conducting a functional behavioral assessment.Washington, DC: Author.
6.
Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice. (1999). Addressing student problem behavior—Part III: Creating positive behavioral intervention plans and supports.Washington DC: Author.
7.
ConroyM. A., FoxJ. J., BucklinA., & GoodW. (1996). An analysis of the reliability and stability of the Motivation Assessment Scale in assessing the challenging behaviors of persons with developmental disabilities.Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 31, 243–250.
8.
DukerP. C., & SigafoosJ. (1998). The Motivation Assessment Scale: Reliability and construct validity across three topographies of behavior.Research in Developmental Disabilities, 19, 131–141.
9.
DurandV. M. (1990). Severe behavior problems: A functional communication training approach.New York: Guilford.
10.
Durand.V. M., & CrimminsD. B. (1988). Identifying the variables maintaining self-injurious behavior.Journal of Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 18, 99–117.
11.
FoxJ. J., & ConroyM. A. (2000). FBA for children and youth with emotional-behavioral disorders: Where we should go in the twenty-first century.Preventing School Failure, 44, 140–144.
12.
FoxJ., ConroyM., & HeckamanK. (1998). Research issues in functional assessment of the challenging behavior of students with emotional and behavioral disorders.Behavioral Disorders, 24, 26–33.
13.
GableR.A. (1999). Functional assessment in school settings.Behavioral Disorders, 24, 246–248.
14.
GreshamF. M., QuinnM. M., & RestoriA. (1999). Methodological issues in functional analysis: Generalizability to other disability groups.Behavioral Disorders, 24, 180–182.
15.
HeckamanK., ConroyM., & FoxJ. (2000). Functional assessment-based intervention research on students with or at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders.Behavioral Disorders, 25, 196–210.
16.
HornerR. H. (1994). Functional assessment: Contributions and future directions.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 401–404.
17.
HowellK. W., & NelsonK. L. (1999). Has public policy exceeded our knowledge base? This is a two-part question.Behavioral Disorders, 24, 331–334.
18.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § § 1400–1487.
19.
JolivetteK., Barton-ArwoodS., & ScottT. (2000). Functional behavioral assessment as a collaborative process among professionals.Education and Treatment of Children, 23, 298–313.
20.
KearneyA. (1994). Interrater reliability of the Motivation Assessment Scale: Another, closer look.Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19, 139–142.
21.
KnosterT. P. (2000). Practical applications of functional behavioral assessment in schools.Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 25, 201–211.
22.
LaneK. L., UmbreitJ., & Beebe-FrankenbergerM. E. (1999). Functional assessment research on students with or at risk for E/BD: 1990 to the present.Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1, 101–111.
23.
LewisT. J., ScottT. M., & SugaiG. (1994). The Problem Behavior Questionnaire: A teacher-based instrument to develop functional hypotheses of problem behavior in general education classrooms.Diagnostique, 19, 103–115.
24.
MathurS. R., QuinnM. M., & RutherfordR. B. (1996). Teacher-mediated behavior management strategies for children with emotional/behavioral disorders [Monograph]. Arlington, VA: Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders.
25.
NelsonJ. R., RobertsM. L., MathurS. R., & RutherfordR. B. (1999). Has public policy exceeded our knowledge base? A review of the functional behavioral assessment literature.Behavioral Disorders, 24, 169–179.
26.
NewtonJ. T., & SturmeyP. (1991). The Motivation Assessment Scale: Interrater reliability and internal consistency in a British sample.Journal of Mental Deficiency, 35, 472–474.
27.
O'NeillR. E., HornerR. H., AlbinR. W., SpragueJ. R., StoreyK., & NewtonJ. S. (1997). Functional assessment and program development for problem behavior: A Practical handbook.Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
28.
SalviaJ., & YsseldykeJ. E. (1991). Assessment.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
29.
SassoG. M., ConroyM. A., StichterJ. P., & FoxJ. J. (2001). Slowing down the bandwagon: The misapplication of functional assessment for students with emotional or behavioral disorders.Behavioral Disorders, 26, 282–296.
30.
ScottT. M., & NelsonC. M. (1999). Functional behavioral assessment: Implications for training and staff development.Behavioral Disorders, 24, 249–252.
31.
SigafoosJ., KerrM., & RobertsD. (1994). Interrater reliability of the Motivation Assessment Scale: Failure to replicate with aggressive behavior.Research in Developmental Disabilities, 15, 333–342.
32.
SpreatS., & ConnellyL. (1996). Reliability analysis of the Motivation Assessment Scale.American Journal on Mental Retardation, 100, 528–532.
33.
StichterJ. P., ShelladyS., SealanderK. A., & EigenbergerM. E. (2000). Teaching what we do know: Preservice training and functional behavioral assessment.Preventing School Failure, 44, 142–146.
34.
SugaiG., HornerR. H., & SpragueJ. R. (1999). Functional-assessment-based behavior support planning: Research to practice to research.Behavioral Disorders, 24, 253–257.
35.
WalkerH. M., ColvinG., & RamseyE. (1995). Antisocial behavior in school: Strategies and best practices.Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
36.
WalkerH. M., & SpragueJ. R. (1999). Longitudinal research and functional behavioral assessment issues.Behavioral Disorders, 24, 335–337.
37.
WehbyJ. H., SymonsF. J., & ShoresR. E. (1995). A descriptive analysis of aggressive behavior in classrooms for children with emotional and behavioral disorders.Behavioral Disorders, 20, 87–105.
38.
YellM., & ShrinerJ. (1997). The IDEA Amendments of 1997: Implications for special and genera education teachers, administrators, and teacher trainers.Focus on Exceptional Children, 30, 1–19.
39.
ZarconeJ. R., RodgersT. A., IwataB. A., RourkeD. A., & DorseyM. F. (1991). Reliability analysis of the Motivation Assessment Scale: A failure to replicate.Research in Developmental Disabilities, 12, 349–360.
