Once a functional
assessment is complete, the next step is to develop a hypothesis
statement—a prediction or “best guess” of the
function or reason a child’s challenging behavior occurs.
This includes a description of the child’s challenging
behavior (i.e., what the behavior looks like), information about
the specific
predictors or triggers that occurred before the child exhibited
challenging behavior, the perceived purpose or function of the
child’s behavior, as well as the maintaining consequences
that followed. Predictors include both what conditions immediately
precede the child’s behavior, as well as any setting events
that may be presumed to increase the likelihood of the challenging
behavior’s occurrence (e.g., lack of sleep, allergies/illnesses,
social and interactional factors). Hypothesis development
is a critically important step toward developing interventions
that are directly linked to
the
function of the child’s challenging behavior (O’Neill
et al., 1997).
Very
young children have brief learning histories (Dunlap & Fox,
1996). In many cases, those with a limited repertoire of behavior
will
often use one behavior for several different purposes. For example,
children often use a general tantrum (prolonged screaming, crying,
pulling away) for multiple functions (e.g., request object and
escape transition). Therefore, when sorting out hypotheses the
support team should address all of the circumstances in which
challenging behavior occurs rather than trying to match an individual
function to each challenging behavior.
Once the
behavior support team identifies its hypotheses, attention should
be paid to the way by which hypotheses are written. They should
be carefully written either as a series of sentences that include
each component (e.g., description, predictors, purpose, maintaining
consequences), or as a “when…then” or “if…then”
statement (Hieneman et al., 1999). Remember the more clearly articulated
the hypothesis, the more likely the hypothesis will clearly communicate
the team’s understanding of the child’s challenging
behavior.
Sample
Hypotheses
Nathan
Nathan appears to use tantrums to request help and objects. When
these tantrums occur, the caregiver is likely to provide attention,
the requested object, or another preferred object. Nathan does
not make requests verbally, but will bring an adult to a desired
object. If he does not receive a consequence for his request,
Nathan will have a tantrum.
Jackson
Jackson avoids the demands of activities that he finds difficult
(structured language-based activities, sharing objects, interactive
play) by resisting or withdrawing. If pushed to participate, Jackson
will react by throwing objects, screaming, or stating “shut
up.” When Jackson resists, adults will often give up or
allow him to leave the activity.
Billy
Billy will use tantrums to request social interaction. When he
desires adult action, Billy will get the adult’s attention
by taking the adult by the hand and physically positioning him
or her. He will then initiate a chase game or request to be held.
If the adult does not comply, Billy will cry loudly, scream, and
bring his hands to his face or ears. If the adult continues to
not meet his request, he will hit the adult. Often the caregiver
will then comply with his request or pick him up.
Aaron
Aaron appears to use tantrums to escape transitions. When Aaron
is prompted to leave an activity or setting, he will respond by
crying, screaming, and dropping
to the floor. In response to the tantrum, Aaron is often provided
with comfort and delayed transition.
Mandy
Mandy will drop, throw, turn over furniture, or push items to
the floor to gain adult attention. In response to the behavior,
the caregiver usually picks up the items, provides her with verbal
feedback (e.g., “o.k., Mandy”) and often will pick
her up.
Not Sure About the Hypothesis?
Sometimes
the function of a child’s behavior is not readily apparent.
In times like this, it helps to ask the following questions to
prompt further understanding of the context in which the behavior
occurs:
·
What would make the problem behavior stop?
· Is it something you would provide or allow the child
the access?
· Is there something to remove?
· Can you allow the child to leave?
If the function
of the child’s behavior still remains uncertain, another
good suggestion is to continue collecting data in the same context.
Another possibility
is that the child’s behavior serves multiple purposes. Not
only is it possible for a single behavior to serve multiple functions,
but it can also change (e.g., from escape to attention). For example,
consider a child who engages in aggressive behavior in order to
escape a non-preferred art activity. The child has been consistently
removed from the activity each time he becomes aggressive. However,
if the child receives a lot of attention from adults when he is
removed from the group, he may become motivated to receive attention
from the adults. Thus, a behavior initially performed for one
reason (e.g., to escape a difficult task) may begin to occur for
a completely different reason (e.g., to obtain attention).
References
Dunlap, G.,
& Fox, L. (1996). Early intervention and serious behavior
problems: A comprehensive approach. In L. K. Koegel, R. L. Koegel,
& G. Dunlap (Eds.) Positive behavioral support: Including
people with difficult behavior in the community (pp. 31-50). Baltimore,
MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Hieneman,
M., Nolan, M., Presley, J., De Turo, L., Roberson, W., & Dunlap,
G. (1999). Facilitator’s guide: Positive behavioral support.
Positive Behavioral Support Project, Florida Department of Education.
O’Neill,
R. E., Horner, R. H., Albin, R. W., Sprague, J. R., Storey, K.,
& Newton, J. S. (1997). Functional assessment and program
development for problem behavior: A practical handbook. Pacific
Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
