Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Caregivers’ Agreement and Validity of Indirect Functional Analysis: A Cross Cultural Evaluation Across Multiple Problem Behavior Topographies

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Motivation Assessment Scale is an aid for hypothesis-driven functional analysis. This study presents its Spanish cross-cultural validation while examining psychometric attributes not yet explored. The study sample comprised 80 primary caregivers of children with autism. Acceptability, scaling assumptions, internal consistency, factor structure, inter-assessor reliability and agreement, and known-group validity analyses were performed. Scaling assumptions, internal consistency (Cronbach alpha of 0.75) and factor structure were satisfactory other than for the Escape domain which demonstrated low internal consistency (0.65), inadequate scaling assumptions (multitrait analysis, 50% success rate) and did not constitute a separate factor. Caregivers’ agreement for the primary function reached 73.9% and known group-validity hypotheses across behavior topographies were partially met. The clinical appropriateness of the scale is discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Finland)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed. Text revised). Arlington VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bihm, E. M., Kienlen, T. L., Ness, M. E., & Poindexter, A. R. (1991). Factor structure of the motivation assessment scale for persons with mental retardation. Psychological Reports, 68, 1235–1238.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bullinger, M., Alonso, J., Apolone, G., Leplege, A., Sullivan, M., Wood-Dauphinee, S., et al. (1998). Translating health status questionnaires and evaluating their quality. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 913–923.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Central Intelligence Agency. (2009). World fact book. Retrieved June 30, 2009 from http://devdata.worldbank.org/hnpstats/cd.asp.

  • Duker, P. C., & Sigafoos, J. (1998). The motivation assessment scale: Reliability and construct validity across three topographies of behavior. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 19, 131–141.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Durand, M., & Crimmins, D. (1988). Identifying the variables maintaining self-injurious behavior. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 18, 99–117.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dziuban, C. D., & Shirkey, E. C. (1974). When is a correlation matrix appropriate for factor analysis? Some decision rules. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 358–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisen, M., Ware, J. E., Donald, C. A., & Brook, R. H. (1979). Measuring components of children’s health status. Medical Care, 17, 902–921.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • EuroQoL group. (2010). EQ-5D: A standardized instrument for use as a measure of health outcome. Retrieved January 26, 2010 from www.euroqol.org.

  • Fombonne, E. (2005). Epidemiology of autistic disorder and other pervasive developmental disorders. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 66(Suppl 10), 3–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, K. A., Walker, M., & Kaufman, J. (2001). Psychometric properties of the questions about behavioral function scale in a child sample. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 112, 122–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gimpel, G. A., & Holand, M. L. (2003). Emotional and behavioral problems of young children: Effective interventions in the preschool and kindergarten years. New York: Guilford press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greer, R. D., & Ross, D. E. (2007). Verbal behavior analysis: Inducing and expanding new verbal capabilities in children with language delays. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, S. S. (2005). Comparing descriptive, experimental and informant-based assessments of problem behaviors. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 26, 514–526.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hanley, G. P., Iwata, B. A., & McCord, B. E. (2003). Functional analysis of behavior problem: A review. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 147–185.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Herzinger, C. V., & Campbell, J. M. (2007). Comparing functional assessment methodologies: A quantitative synthesis. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37, 1430–1445.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179–185.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • International Test Commission. (2000). Test adaptation guidelines. Retrieved June 20, 2009 from http://www.intestcom.org/Guidelines/test+adaptation.php.

  • Iwata, B. A. (1996). Functional analysis screening tool. Gainesville, FL: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iwata, B. A., Dorsey, M. F., Slifer, K. J., Bauman, K. E., & Richman, G. S. (1994a). Toward a functional analysis of self-injury. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 197–209. (Original document published 1982).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Iwata, B. A., & Dozier, C. L. (2008). Clinical application of functional analysis methodology. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1, 3–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iwata, B. A., Pace, G. M., Dorsey, M. F., Zarcone, J. R., Vollmer, T. R., Smith, R. G., et al. (1994b). The functions of self-injurious behavior: An experimental-epidemiological analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 215–240.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Joosten, A. V., & Bundy, A. C. (2008). The motivation of stereotypic and repetitive behavior: Examination of construct validity of the motivation assessment scale. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 1341–1348.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Juniper, E. F., Guyatt, G. H., & Jaeschke, R. (1996). How to develop and validate a new health-related quality of life instrument. In B. Spilker (Ed.), Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials (2nd ed., pp. 49–56). Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kearney, C. A. (1994). Interrater reliability of the motivation assessment scale: Another, closer look. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19, 139–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kearney, C. A., Cook, C., Chapman, G., & Bensaheb, A. (2006). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the motivation assessment scale and resident choice assessment scale. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 18, 2–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, C. H. (2005). Single-case design for educational research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2007). FACTOR: A computer program to fit the exploratory factor analysis model. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 38, 88–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mardia, K. V. (1970). Measures of multivariate skewnees and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika, 57, 519–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Martin, P. (in press). Composite rating scales. Journal of Neurological Sciences. Downloaded October 6, 2009 from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6T06-4X4XGRP-4/2/58a451ef09a9fe6c475aac66fbbe0f1a.

  • Maurice, C., Green, G., & Foxx, R. M. (2001). Making a difference: Behavioral intervention for autism. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • McHorney, C. A., & Tarlov, A. R. (1995). Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: Are available health status surveys adequate? Quality of Life Research, 4, 293–307.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mislevy, R. J., & Bock, R. D. (1990). BILOG 3 Item analysis and test scoring with binary logistic models. Mooresville, NC: Scientific Software.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthen, B., & Kaplan, D. (1985). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38, 171–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling procedures: Issues and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson, J., Konstantinidi, E., & Furniss, F. (2006). On some psychometric properties of the questions about behavioral function (QABF) scale. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 27, 337–352.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paclawskyj, T. R., Matson, J. L., Rush, K. S., Smalls, Y., & Vollmer, T. R. (2000). Questions about behavioral function (QABF): A behavioral checklist for functional assessment of aberrant behavior. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 21, 223–239.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Paclawskyj, T. R., Matson, J. L., Rush, K. S., Smalls, Y., & Vollmer, T. R. (2001). Assessment of the convergent validity of the questions about behavioral function scale with analogue functional analysis and the motivation assessment scale. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 45, 484–494.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. (2002). Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria. Quality of Life Research, 11, 193–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shogren, K. A., & Rojahn, J. (2003). Convergent reliability and validity of the questions about behavioral function and the motivation assessment scale: A replication study. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 15, 367–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sigafoos, J., Kerr, M., & Roberts, D. (1994). Interrater reliability of the motivation assessment scale: Failure to replicate with aggressive behavior. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 15, 333–342.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, N. N., Donatelli, L. S., Best, A., & Williams, D. E. (1993). Factor structure of the motivation assessment scale. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 37, 65–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spreat, S., & Connelly, L. (1996). A reliability analysis of the motivation assessment scale. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 100, 528–532.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, R. H., & Iwata, B. A. (2007). A comparison of outcomes from descriptive and functional analyses of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 333–338.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vollmer, T. R., Marcus, B. A., Ringdahl, J. E., & Roane, H. S. (1995). Progressing from brief assessments to extended experimental analyses in the evaluation of aberrant behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 561–576.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ware, J. E., & Gandek, B. (1998). Methods for testing data quality, scaling assumptions and reliability. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 945–952.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wasano, L. C., Borrero, J. C., & Kohn, C. S. (2009). Brief report: A comparison of indirect versus experimental strategies for the assessment of pica. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 18, 99–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization. (2001). World health organization disability assessment schedule (2nd ed.). Retrieved January 26, 2010 from www.who.int/icidh/whodas/index.html.

  • Zarcone, J., Rodgers, T., Iwata, B., Rourke, D., & Dorsey, M. (1991). Reliability analysis of the motivation assessment scale: A failure to replicate. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 12, 349–360.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Javier Virues-Ortega

    Present address: Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada

  2. David Segui-Duran

    Present address: Community Mental Health Unit, Hospital de Antequera, Málaga, Spain

  3. Alberto Descalzo-Quero

    Present address: Community Mental Health Unit, Hospital de Baza, Granada, Spain

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ABA España, Apto. 44068, 28029, Madrid, Spain

    Javier Virues-Ortega

  2. Children Mental Health Unit, Hospital Universitario Carlos Haya, Málaga, Spain

    David Segui-Duran

  3. Children Mental Health Unit, Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain

    Alberto Descalzo-Quero

  4. Centro Al-Mudarïs, Córdoba, Spain

    Jose Julio Carnerero

  5. European Association for Behaviour Analysis, London, UK

    Neil Martin

Authors
  1. Javier Virues-Ortega
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Segui-Duran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alberto Descalzo-Quero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jose Julio Carnerero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Neil Martin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Javier Virues-Ortega.

Additional information

Authors are indebted to the Autism Association of Málaga (Asociación Autismo Málaga) for volunteering their resources for this project. Dr. Rafaela Caballero (Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Macarena, and University of Seville) facilitated data collection in Seville.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Virues-Ortega, J., Segui-Duran, D., Descalzo-Quero, A. et al. Caregivers’ Agreement and Validity of Indirect Functional Analysis: A Cross Cultural Evaluation Across Multiple Problem Behavior Topographies. J Autism Dev Disord 41, 82–91 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-010-1022-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-010-1022-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation