Variables affecting ratings of intervention acceptability and effectiveness have been widely studied. In the literature, several variables have produced reliable results, such as type of intervention and severity of problem behavior. One variable that remains uninvestigated is the effect of providing functional analysis information on ratings of interventions. We analyzed the ratings of 55 teachers for both the effectiveness and acceptability of a range of interventions. We also evaluated the impact on those ratings of providing three levels of functional information about the targeted problem behavior: (a) structural (descriptive) information, (b) information describing an escape function (negative reinforcement), and (c) information describing an attention function (positive reinforcement). Sample demographics are reported, along with scores on an evaluation of knowledge of behavioral principles and causes of problem behavior. The teachers differentially rated brief interruption and differential reinforcement according to the functional information provided in the case vignettes. Severity of the problem behavior did not influence ratings. The implications of the findings are discussed in terms of teacher training and support for intervention efforts that include functional assessment strategies.
AndersonC. M.MullenK. B.FreemanK. A.LewisJ.WeigleK.KirkK.ScottiJ. R. (1995, May). Assessment of a course designed to increase educators' understanding of behavioral principles and functional assessment methodologies. Poster presented at the 21st annual convention of the Association for Behavior Analysis, Washington, DC.
2.
BihmE. M.SigelmanC. K.WestbrookJ. P. (1997). Social implications of behavioral interventions for persons with mental retardation. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 101, 567–578.
3.
CarrE. G.DurandV. M. (1985). Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 111–126.
4.
CarrE. G.HornerR. H.TurnbullA.MarquisJ. G.McLaughlinD. MagitoMcAteeM. L.SmithC. E.RyanK. AndersonRuefM. B.DoolabhA. (1999). Positive behavior support for people with developmental disabilities: A research synthesis. Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.
5.
CarrJ. E.AustinJ. L.BrittonL. N.KellumK. K.BaileyJ. S. (1999). An assessment of social validity trends in applied behavior analysis. Behavioral Interventions, 14, 223–231.
6.
ClarkL.ElliottS. N. (1988). The influence of treatment strength information of knowledgeable teachers' pretreatment evaluations of social skills training methods. School Psychology, 3, 258–269.
7.
Cross-CalvertS.JohnstonC. (1990). Acceptability of treatments for child behavior problems: Issues and implications for future research. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 19, 61–74.
8.
DurandV. M. (1990). Severe behavior problems: A functional communication training approach. New York: Guilford Press.
9.
DurandV. M.CarrE. G. (1992). An analysis of maintenance following functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 777–794.
10.
ElliottS. N. (1988). Acceptability of behavioral treatments: A review of variables that influence treatment selection. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 19, 68–80.
11.
FosterS. L.MashE. J. (1999). Assessing social validity in clinical treatment research: Issues and procedures. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 308–319.
12.
GajriaM.SalendS. J. (1996). Treatment acceptability: A critical dimension for overcoming teacher resistance to implementing adaptations for mainstreamed students. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Disabilities, 12, 91–108.
13.
HastingsR. P. (1999). The dialogue between research and application: A focus on practical issues in behavioral intervention. In ScottiJ. R.MeyerL. H. (Eds.), Behavioral intervention: Principles, models, and practices (pp. 433–448). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
14.
HawkinsR. P. (1991). Is social validity what we are interested in? Argument for a functional approach. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 205–213.
15.
IrvinL. K.LundervoldD. A. (1988). Social validation of decelerative (punishment) procedures by special educators of severely handicapped students. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 9, 331–350.
16.
IwataB. A. (1987). Negative reinforcement in applied behavior analysis: An emerging technology. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 20, 361–378.
17.
IwataB. A.PaceG. M.DorseyM. F.ZarconeJ. R.VollmerT. R.SmithR. G.RodgersT. A.DorotheaC. L.ShoreB. A.MazaleskiJ. L.GohH.CowderyG. E.KalsherM. J.McCoshK. C.WillisK. D. (1994). The functions of self-injurious behavior: An experimental-epidemiological analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 215–240.
18.
JamesK. M.ScottiJ. R. (2000). The educative approach to intervention with child excess behavior: Toward an application to parent training packages. Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 20, 1–37.
19.
KazdinA. E. (1980). Acceptability of alternative treatments for deviant child behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 259–273.
20.
KazdinA. E. (1981). Acceptability of child treatment techniques: The influence of treatment efficacy and adverse side effects. Behavior Therapy, 12, 493–506.
21.
KempF. D.MiltenbergerR. G.LumleyV. A. (1996). Treatment acceptability and “faking good”: Are staff telling us what they think we want to hear?Behavioral Interventions, 11, 181–191.
22.
KirkK. S. (1999). Functional analysis and selection of intervention strategies for people with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. In ScottiJ. R.MeyerL. H. (Eds.), Behavioral intervention: Principles, models, and practices (pp. 71–99). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
23.
KutsickK. A.GutkinT. B.WittJ. C. (1991). The impact of treatment development process, intervention type, and problem severity on treatment acceptability as judged by classroom teachers. Psychology in the Schools, 28, 325–331.
24.
LennoxD. B.MiltenbergerR. G. (1990). On the conceptualization of treatment acceptability. Education and Treatment in Mental Retardation, 25, 211–224.
25.
MillerD. L.KelleyM. L. (1992). Treatment acceptability: The effects of parent gender, marital adjustment, and child behavior. Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 14, 11–23.
26.
MiltenbergerR. G. (1990). Assessment of treatment acceptability: A review of the literature. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 10, 24–38.
27.
MiltenbergerR. G.LumleyV. A. (1997). Evaluating the influence of problem function on treatment acceptability. Behavioral Interventions, 12, 105–111.
28.
MiltenbergerR. G.SudaK. T.LennoxD. B.LindemanD. P. (1991). Assessing the acceptability of behavioral treatments to persons with mental retardation. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 96, 291–298.
29.
O'DellS. L.Tarler-BenloloL.FlynnJ. M. (1979). An instrument to measure knowledge of behavioral principles as applied to children. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 10, 29–34.
30.
RasnakeL. K.MartinJ.TarnowskiK. J.MulickJ. A. (1993). Acceptability of behavioral treatments: Influence of knowledge of behavioral principles. Mental Retardation, 31, 247–251.
31.
ReimersT. M.WackerD. P.CooperL. J.DeRaadA. O. (1992). Clinical evaluation of the variables associated with treatment acceptability and their relation to compliance. Behavioral Disorders, 18, 67–76.
32.
ReimersT. M.WackerD. P.KoepplG. (1987). Acceptability of behavioral interventions: A review of the literature. School Psychology Review, 16, 212–227.
33.
RobertsonM.BowmanR.WoodsJ.WeigleK.ScottiJ. R. (1994, April). Attitudes of parents and educators about persons with disabilities, inclusion, and the causes of excess behavior. Poster presented at the spring conference of the West Virginia Psychological Association, Charleston, WV.
34.
RodgersA. Y. (1992). Acceptability of time out procedures for schoolage children: Evaluations by direct care staff and students in child development and child care. Child and Youth Care Forum, 21, 196–208.
35.
ScottiJ. R.EvansI. M.MeyerL. H.WalkerP. (1991). A meta-analysis of intervention research with problem behavior: Treatment validity and standards of practice. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 96, 233–256.
36.
ScottiJ. R.MullenK. B.HawkinsR. P. (1998). Child conduct and developmental disabilities: From theory to practice in the treatment of excess behaviors. In PlaudJ. J.EifertG. H. (Eds.), From behavior theory to behavior therapy (pp. 172–202). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
37.
ScottiJ. R.TrawitzkiA. L.StasiewiczP. R. (1988). Evaluation of treatment techniques along multiple dimensions. Poster presented at the 15th annual convention of the Association for Behavior Analysis, Milwaukee, WI.
38.
ScottiJ. R.UjcichK. J.WeigleK. L.HollandC.KirkK. S. (1996). Interventions with challenging behavior of persons with developmental disabilities: A review of current research practices. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 21, 123–134.
39.
SinghN. N.KatzR. C. (1985). On the modification of acceptability ratings for alternative child treatments. Behavior Modification, 9, 375–387.
40.
SpreatS.LipinskiD.DickersonR.NassR.DorseyM. (1989). The acceptability of electric shock programs. Behavior Modification, 13, 245–256.
41.
StoreyK.HornerR. H. (1991). An evaluative review of social validation research involving persons with handicaps. Journal of Special Education, 25, 352–401.
42.
TarnowskiK. J.RasnakeL. K.MulickJ. A.KellyP. A. (1989). Acceptability of behavioral interventions for self-injurious behavior. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 93, 575–580.
43.
TarnowskiK. J.SimonianS. J.ParkA.BekenyP. (1992). Acceptability of treatments for child behavioral disturbance: Race, socioeconomic status, and multicomponent treatment effects. Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 14, 25–37.
44.
ThomasS.ArnettG.KennamerE.KeimK.SineA.FosterA.DummK.TannerC.MarkusM.AndersonC. M.ScottiJ. R. (1995, April). Outcome of a graduate course on nonaversive intervention: Level of information and selection of intervention strategy. Poster presented at the spring conference of the West Virginia Psychological Association, Charleston, WV.
45.
WeigleK. L. (1997). Positive behavior support as a model for promoting educational inclusion. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 22, 36–48.
46.
WeigleK. L.ScottiJ. R.KirkK. S.BowmanR.RobertsonM.KincaidD. (1995, May). Explanations of the excess behavior of students with developmental disabilities: A validation study. Poster presented at the 21st annual convention of the Association for Behavior Analysis, Washington, DC.
47.
WeigleK. L.ScottiJ. R.KirkK. S.RodeC.KincaidD.BowmanR.RobertsonM. (1994, May). The effects of functional analysis information on treatment acceptability ratings. Poster presented at the 20th annual convention of the Association for Behavior Analysis, Atlanta, GA.
48.
WittJ. C.RobbinsJ. R. (1985). Acceptability of reductive interventions for the control of inappropriate child behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 13, 59–67.
49.
WolfM. M. (1978). Social validity: The case for subjective measurement or how applied behavior analysis is finding its heart. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 203–214.
