Functional AnalysesFiguring out the source of the problem, the problem, and the resolution of the problem

Functional Analyses

Has long been established in behavior analysis that one must understand the Antecedents

Behavior

Consequences

of any situation in order to alter the behavior

Hence Functional Analyses of behavior were created

Functional analyses

Initially developed by Brian Iwata

Investigates potential maintaining consequences for problem behavior Initially for kids

Now many organisms (e.g., Farmer-Dougan, in press, for captive wild animals!).

Involves Direct observation and repeated measurement

Across several situations that attempt to mimic possible maintaining situations

Functional Analysis

Must get baseline first: examine environment before begin testing

Assess validity by comparing rates of behavior across the different settings/conditions

Repeat until 1 or more settings found to elicit target behavior at highest and most steady rate

Four Settings

Alone: client in barren room (no obvious reinforcers) See if behavior is self-reinforcing or self-maintaining

E.g., self stim behavior (excessive licking)

Attention: Provide client with attention only when client exhibits

behavior

E.g., child hits head, you run and get him to stop

Can look at attention vs. access to food or tangible

Four Settings

Demand: client is asked to engage in contingent activity

Demands made on client to engage in behavior

E.g., doing math problems, obeying commands

See if behavior increases (to escape demands)

Play: Typically control procedure Client allowed to play in room

No contingencies or demands

Attention given for any behavior

Let’s apply this to dogs

#1 reason dogs are returned to shelter: behavioral problems!

About 26%

How can shelter/rescue workers develop assessment system that Doesn’t involve prior owner

Doesn’t involve long and complicated process or questionnaires

Is quick, effective and efficient

Dorsey, et al., Functional Analysis with dogs

Recruited dogs who jumped on people No aggression

Young adult dogs

No known health issues

Conducted both a Questionnaire

Assessment phase

Dorsey et al.’s questionnaire

Assessment

Each of 4 conditions presented for 5 min (2 min ITI) Play, ignore, tangible, demand, attention

All 5 presentations = 1 cycle; no more than 2 cycles/day

Continued with cycles until problem area was identified

Assessment Conditions

Began with walking in door/greeting (SD)

Ignore: entered room but

gave no attention or eye contact to dog

Attention: Entered room;

only gave attention when dog jumped up;

petted, hugged dog for 20 sec after each jump

Play: dog given squeaky toy Dog allowed to play with toy

Attention given for 5 of every 20 seconds (noncontingent)

Assessment Conditions

Demand entered room

Gave commands that were within the dogs’ behavioral repertoire

Food require for compliance with command

Repeated commands until complied

Tangible Entered room;

Experimenter held high-demand toy

Tried to elicit jumping by holding toy up high

Treatment Phase

Once identified sustaining variable, used this as part of treatment

Treatment based on maintaining variable of the behavior, not on the function of the behavior Why the dog jumped up

Not that the dog hurt you or pushed you over

Treatment Types

Attention:

Gave no attention for 20 sec

If dog did not jump up for 20 sec, lots of attention

If dog did jump up; timer restarted

Demand:

If dog jumped up during command, was ignored

Command was carried through anyway

Attention ONLY for compliance

Tangible

No toy unless no jumping for 20 sec

Again, timer restarted if jumped

Results

Note that used nonparmetric stats Used when have small N or lopsided data

Looked to see what drove jumping!

Noted that the assessment matched survey

Results of treatment:

Was successful!

Okay, so…..

Functional analysis works

But, hard for general shelter workers to use Not want to conduct these ‘phases’ or cycles

Not want to have to do data analysis

Alternative? A canned method Emily

Okay, so…..

Alternative? A canned method Dr. Emily Weiss, director of companion animal behavior at

ASPCA

Developed the Meet Your Match program

Both a functional analysis AND a behavioral assessment program

Two components

SAFER

Canine-ality

The MYM SAFER

Examines behavior in several domains Look

(touch) sensitivity

Tag (play)

Squeeze (again touch sensitivity)

Food behavior (in dish)

Toy behavior (reinforcer assessment)

Dog to dog behavior

The MYM Canine-ality

Examines behavior across several domains: Left alone

Greeting

Crate

Play

Food motivation

Manners

Sum score to get activity level

Then assess motivation

Social (all people)

Independent (not attached to people)

One person dog

Is the Canine-ality a functional assessment?

Yes

Look at domains: Alone/ignore

Attention

Demand

Play

Tangible and food

Is a quick and dirty way to conduct a FA

Problems with the Canine-ality?

Should you use when the dog first arrives at shelter or class? Why or why not?

Could environment alter the results?

Could who gives the assessment alter the results?

Need to use with care and understand its limits

For shelters/rescues ALSO use the adopter survey

Adopter survey looks at what kind of activity level/expectations the family might have.

MYM = meet your match

Attempt to match right dog to right family

Works very well when used appropriately!