6 Pages references not includedTOPIC How Culture plays a role i

6 Pages references not included
TOPIC: How Culture plays a role in ASD AUTISM Spectrum
Disorder
References: 8 or more
THESE REFERENCES MUST BE IN APA FORMAT!!
Ascension St. Vincent's Foundation
09/18/2022
Ascension St. Vincent's Foundation
Background Information
Ascension St. Vincent's was founded in 1916 by the Daughters
of Charity in response to a request made by Bishop James
Michael Curley of St. Augustine. The Daughters of Charity
arrived in Jacksonville in 1916. To meet the overwhelming
demand for superior medical care in the Jacksonville area, four

sisters responded by establishing our non-profit, faith-based
hospital. Since the beginning of the twentieth century, many
who work in the medical field have dedicated their lives to
helping others who are ill or injured.
In 1982, the Ascension St. Vincent's Organization came into
being as a philanthropic foundation with the intention of
catering to the requirements of our healthcare mission. Our kind
donors contribute more than $6 million annually to assist in
funding essential community outreach programs, capital
upgrades, and cutting-edge medical technology at our Riverside,
Southside, and Clay campuses. These programs and
technologies are located throughout the United States.
Organizational Context
Ascension St. Vincent Hospital, which is sponsored by the
charitable endeavors of Ascension St. Vincent Foundation, is
dedicated to aiding all people with a specific focus on the weak
and vulnerable. This commitment is rooted in the compassionate
ministry of Jesus as a healer. The Catholic health ministry aims
to provide care that prioritizes the spiritual well -being of
patients and the communities in which they live. Our words and
actions reflect our dedication to creating a more compassionate
and egalitarian world.
Ascension St Vincent having to provide healthcare services is
vital to society and the public. The organization getting into the
private sector will mean a seek for profit, expensive services to
the public, and a possible reduction in quality of service. People
compete for jobs in the public sector like it is a marathon
because of the attractive perks these companies offer to their
employees. On the other hand, in the private sector, your work
is never safe, even if you stay in one place for years; a single
mistake might result in your dismissal at any time.
Analysis
Evansville, Indiana's St. Mary's Hospital merged with the more
extensive Ascension St. Vincent healthcare system in 2012 to
provide better medical services to the city's citizens. In its
mission statement, the Catholic non-profit Ascension says it "is

committed to providing humane, tailored care to all, with
special attention to those living in poverty and even those most
disadvantaged" (Ascension, About Our Organization). The
Ascension St. Vincent hospital in Evansville, Indiana, has
undergone several improvements in recent years, including
expanding the main hospital's footprint and establishing St.
Vincent clinics across the tristate area to serve better patients
who reside further from the main campus.
They can now provide services in mental and behavioral
healthcare, cancer care, heart and vascular care, childbirth,
orthopedics, pediatrics, radiology, geriatrics, bariatrics,
women's health, and wound care. As a result, people in the area
can get high-quality specialty treatment without traveling to far-
off cities like Indianapolis, Indiana, or Nashville, Tennessee.
Ascension has observed that some people may find it
challenging to locate a doctor and make sense of the maze of
healthcare options available to them. Studies show that patients
unable to efficiently navigate the system either cease going for
routine checks or fail to follow up on necessary diagnostic
procedures. Because of this, patients' conditions tend to worsen
before they eventually seek care.
Ascension has developed a program called "Ascension Care
Management" to aid patients in navigating their health
insurance, obtaining necessary pre-certifications and prior
authorizations, scheduling necessary appointments, deciding on
an appropriate treatment course, and selecting a provider who
accepts their insurance. They help "healthcare providers,
payers, and some other healthcare leaders" by making
healthcare more accessible and simpler to administer. (Higher
Ground, Our Story)
Healthcare staff and patients alike will appreciate the hospital's
newfound use of technology to automate mundane activities and
analyze patient data. Traditionally, patients must first describe
their symptoms to their primary care physician before being
sent to a specialist. At that point, the specialist would either
order more diagnostic tests or ask the patient to repeat their

symptoms. The patients were understandably annoyed, and in
the end, some data would be lost. With the introduction of new
technology, patients must fill out electronic questionnaires once
with their health information and then explain the specifics of
their present condition to the doctor or nurse, who will
subsequently enter that information and their notes into the
electronic file.
Appointment reminders, precise instructions, driving directions,
etc., are all sent to patients through email after they have been
referred to a specialist electronically.I can see Ascension has
done great jobs. However, I was looking for problems and
which solutions could be suggested by you. So I think you
might want to revise this analysis parts. You can point out
Ascension has lower retention rates in frontline workers or even
nurses if it happened. Because it will be linked to your
conclusion at the end. You can provide 3 problems in your
organization and potential solutions which you can suggest. (
Please use the guidance in red to make adjustments) in And if
they have any queries, they can type them into the patient portal
for the doctor to look through beforehand. Since less time is
lost and more time can be spent discussing treatment
alternatives now that the patient is at the expert appointment on
time and prepared to leave. Ascension could better assist their
doctors and patients thanks primarily to data gathering and
analysis advancements, which were previously discussed.
Conclusion
Communication methods or managerial abilities that strengthen
Ascension St. Vincent's Foundation, Inc.'s capacity to convey
its mission to staff, volunteers, and supporters would be greatly
appreciated. Fundraising could be vital to the organization's
success if it were more organized and efficient.I assume that
you want to work more on these two conditions and add one
more your concerns about Ascension. And then, you want to
suggest some solutions regarding these problems. Ascension St.
Vincent's Foundation, Inc. could benefit from the following

tactics and management expertise: Simplifying the
organization's objective and goals in easily understandable
language, creating a method of monitoring and reporting on
mission advancement, Implementing industry standards for
donor interactions and stewardship, Improving communication
as well as cooperation between various departments and teams,
Improving the current system of grant applications and
fundraising.
Further comments, I think you described good things in your
analysis section. So I recommend you modify this part and
conclusion. If you modified that, I think it would be great.
Reference
Ascension. (n.d.). About Our Healthcare Organization.
Retrieved September 4, 2021, from
https://ascension.org/about
Ascension. (n.d.). About Us. Retrieved September 7, 2021, from
https://ascensioncaremanagement.com/About-Us

Vol.:(0123456789)
Journal of Behavioral Education
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-020-09419-w
1 3
ORIGINAL PAPER
Impact of Language on Behavior Assessment Outcomes
Leslie Neely1 · Amarie Carnett1,4 · S. Shanun Kunnavatana2 ·
Jordan Wimberley3 · Katherine Cantrell1,3
Accepted: 23 October 2020
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer
Nature 2020
Abstract
Conducting a functional analysis is the “gold standard” of
behavior assessment with
best practices recommending identification of idiosyncratic
variables as essential to
valid results. One potential variable that might impact
assessment results is language
of assessment. For individuals who operate in environments
with multiple languages
(e.g., English and Spanish), the language of assessment might
differentially impact
assessment results. Therefore, there is a need to evaluate if
language of assessment
affects identified function. The current study presents the
results of 10 cases in
which the experimenters conducted assessments (i.e., functional
analysis) in both
the Spanish and English language. Participants were nine

children with autism who
engaged in problem behavior and whose parents reported
Spanish as the primary
home language. Result indicates correspondence of function for
eight of the ten
cases. Discussion of results and recommendations for practice
and future research
are presented.
Keywords Functional analysis · Language · Spanish
Introduction
Functional analyses have been well established as a valid way
to identify the
maintaining variables for behavior (Iwata and Dozier 2008).
Conducting a func-
tional analysis is often regarded as the standard for functional
behavioral assess-
ments. In 2003, Hanley, Iwata, and McCord laid out initial best
practices for a
* Leslie Neely
[email protected]
1 Department of Educational Psychology, University of Texas
At San Antonio, 501 West Cesar E
Chavez, San Antonio, TX 78207, USA
2 Easterseals UCP of North Carolina & Virginia, Raleigh, USA
3 Autism Treatment Center of San Antonio, San Antonio, USA
4 Present Address: University of Victoria of Wellington,
Wellington, New Zealand
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s10864-020-
09419-w&domain=pdf

1 3
functional analysis, including attending to establishing
operations before and
during the assessment. In addition, they discussed the potential
need to evalu-
ate idiosyncratic environmental variables when functional
analysis data are undif-
ferentiated. Schlichenmeyer et al. (2013) reviewed 42 studies
published between
2001 and 2010 that implemented idiosyncratic procedural
modifications and
identified more than 30 idiosyncratic variables that had been
tested. For example,
when testing for social negative reinforcement, the difficulty,
preference for, and/
or amount of a task may be relevant, whereas the specific type
of attention or
duration of access to a preferred activity may be relevant when
testing for social
positive reinforcement. Although there are numerous
idiosyncratic variables that
can be tested for any given individual, the concern remains
identifying only those
that are relevant to the occurrence of problem behavior.
Schlichenmeyer et al. (2013) presented strategies used to
identify the relevant
idiosyncratic variables and concluded that a more systematic
pre-assessment
approach was warranted. However, it is common practice to
modify the standard
procedures so that antecedents and reinforcement mirror what

has been reported
in indirect assessments or direct assessments (Hanley et al.
2003). For exam-
ple, tasks used to test for behavior maintained by social
negative reinforcement
are typically those that have been identified by a stakeholder as
tasks that occa-
sion the target behavior. Similarly, the attention delivered
contingent on problem
behavior during an attention condition reflects how others
commonly respond to
the behavior in the natural environment (e.g., statements of
concern, brief repri-
mands, etc.). These types of variables are typically manipulated
during a func-
tional analysis from the outset. Another variable that may be
critical to consider
when developing initial assessment procedures is the language
in which the func-
tional analysis is conducted.
There has been an increased focus on linguistic diversity in the
field of applied
behavior analysis (e.g., Brodhead et al. 2014; Fong et al. 2016;
Lim et al. 2018).
However, limited research has been conducted evaluating the
effect language has
on the outcome of a functional analysis. For example, Rispoli
et al. (2011) evalu-
ated the language of implementation on the functional analysis
results for one
child who lived in a Spanish-speaking home. The results
indicated that higher
levels of responding were observed during the English attention
and escape con-
ditions in comparison with conditions where Spanish was

spoken only. A study
by Lang et al. (2011) found that lower rates of problem
behavior occurred during
instruction delivered in Spanish than English for a 4-year-old
girl diagnosed with
autism who lived in a Spanish-speaking home. Similarly,
Aguilar et al. (2017)
evaluated language preference during instruction for five
children with autism
and found that four of the participant had clear preferences
specifically during
difficult tasks. Collectively, these studies suggest that language
can alter the evoc-
ative effect of antecedents and the reinforcing effect of
consequences during a
functional analysis.
In the current study, the experimenters evaluated the role of
language on func-
tional analysis outcomes for children with an autism spectrum
disorder (ASD). In
particular, this study sought to evaluate if the language of
assessment effects the
1 3
identified function, and if language of assessment effects the
patterns of behavior
observed.
Method

Participants
The study procedures were approved by the Institutional Review
Board at the lead
author’s university prior to initiation of the study. Participants
were included in this
study if they (a) presented with problem behavior warranting a
functional analysis,
(b) had a guardian report the participant lived in household
where Spanish was the
dominant language, (c) had a guardian report the participant
received instruction in
a school or clinical setting in English, (d) had a guardian
consent to the research
procedures, and (e) responded correctly to one-step instructions
in both languages
(a simple test of receptive language). A total of 9 participants
met the inclusion cri-
teria for this study, one participant participated in two separate
functional analysis
(Gabe). Gabe was referred to this study for one topography of
behavior. However,
during the first functional analysis, a distinct secondary
response class emerged, and
a second FA was conducted for him. All had a medical
diagnosis of ASD prior to
participation in the study. A summary of the participant
demographic information
and operational definitions of their target behavior are provided
in Table 1.
Settings and Materials
Experimenters conducted all of the sessions at two outpatient
behavior analysis clin-
ics. The assessment room at site one contained an adult sized

chair, two child-sized
chairs, a child-sized table, and the relevant session materials.
The assessment room
at site two contained one child sized chair, an adult sized chair,
a long table, and
relevant session materials. Relevant session materials included
materials necessary
for the social-positive conditions (e.g., preferred stimuli such as
tablets, bubbles,
doll house, and printing material), social-negative conditions
(e.g., materials such as
picture cards and dry erase board and markers), and non-vocal
play (e.g., preferred
stimuli such as tablets, puzzles, coloring books and markers,
doll house, cars, play-
doh, and trains).
Sessions were video-taped and one experimenter implemented
the session
(“implementer”), while a second experimenter videoed the
session. For Gabe and
Spencer, consent was not provided for video, and two data
collectors were present
during their sessions in addition to the implementer. The
implementer spoke in only
the relevant language (e.g., Spanish during the Spanish FA).
Sessions were con-
ducted 1 to 2 days per week. The FAs were conducted at an
outpatient clinic over the
course of three years. Individual FAs were conducted over the
course of four weeks.
Session length was kept consistent at 5 min.

1 3
Ta
bl
e
1
P
ar
tic
ip
an
t i
nf
or
m
at
io
n
Pa
rti
ci
pa
nt
A

ge
(y
rs
)
G
en
de
r
Ta
rg
et
b
eh
av
io
r
Ja
ck
ie
5
Fe
m
al
e

Ag
gr
es
si
on
: h
itt
in
g,
p
us
hi
ng
, o
r h
ai
r p
ul
lin
g
Sc
re
am
in

g:
v
oc
al
iz
at
io
ns
a
bo
ve
c
on
ve
rs
at
io
n
le
ve
l
Sl
at
er

5
M
al
e
Ag
gr
es
si
on
: h
itt
in
g,
k
ic
ki
ng
, o
r p
us
hi
ng
A
le

x
5
M
al
e
Ag
gr
es
si
on
: h
itt
in
g,
k
ic
ki
ng
, o
r b
iti
ng
C
ar

lo
s
5
M
al
e
Ag
gr
es
si
on
: h
itt
in
g
or
k
ic
ki
ng
Fl
op
pi
ng

: m
ov
in
g
fro
m
a
si
tti
ng
to
a
la
yi
ng
p
os
iti
on
o
r a
st
an
di

ng
to
a
la
yi
ng
p
os
iti
on
Pr
op
er
ty
d
es
tr
uc
tio
n:
th
ro
w
in

g
m
at
er
ia
ls
, h
itt
in
g
or
k
ic
ki
ng
su
rfa
ce
s
Je
re
m
y
6

M
al
e
Ag
gr
es
si
on
: h
itt
in
g
or
k
ic
ki
ng
Fl
op
pi
ng
: m
ov
in

g
fro
m
a
si
tti
ng
to
a
la
yi
ng
p
os
iti
on
o
r a
st
an
di
ng
to
a

la
yi
ng
p
os
iti
on
G
ab
e
#1
11
M
al
e
Ag
gr
es
si
on
: h
itt
in
g,

k
ic
ki
ng
, p
us
hi
ng
, o
r s
cr
at
ch
in
g
G
ab
e
#2
11
M
al
e
Sc

re
am
in
g:
v
oc
al
iz
at
io
ns
a
bo
ve
c
on
ve
rs
at
io
n
le
ve
l

El
is
e
4
Fe
m
al
e
Sc
re
am
in
g:
v
oc
al
iz
at
io
ns
a
bo
ve
c

on
ve
rs
at
io
n
le
ve
l;
ex
cl
ud
es
si
ng
in
g
an
d
vo
ca
liz
at
io

ns
a
cc
om
pa
ni
ed
b
y
la
ug
hi
ng
Pr
op
er
ty
d
es
tr
uc
tio
n:
th

ro
w
in
g
m
at
er
ia
ls
A
lfo
nz
o
5
M
al
e
Ag
gr
es
si
on
: h
itt

in
g,
k
ic
ki
ng
, p
us
hi
ng
, o
r p
ul
lin
g
ha
ir
Sp
en
ce
r
8
M
al

e
Sc
re
am
in
g:
v
oc
al
iz
at
io
ns
a
bo
ve
c
on
ve
rs
at
io
na
l l

ev
el
Pr
op
er
ty
d
es
tr
uc
tio
n:
th
ro
w
in
g
m
at
er
ia
ls
, p
us

hi
ng
ta
bl
e
or
c
ha
irs
, o
r h
itt
in
g
or
k
ic
ki
ng
su
rfa
ce
C
ur

si
ng
: s
ay
in
g
ph
ra
se
s t
ha
t i
nc
lu
de
th
e
w
or
d(
s)
, "
f*
**

,"
"s
**
*,
" "
b*
**
*
1 3
Response Measurement and Interobserver Agreement
Problem behavior included aggression, screaming, flopping,
property destruction,
and cursing. The operational definitions for each behavior are
provided in Table 1.
Frequency data for the problem behavior were collected li ve
during the FA was col-
lected using paper and pencil method with the exception of the
frequency data for
Jackie, Slater, and Alex (which were recoded from video-taped
sessions). Following
completion of the FAs, trained observers collected latency data
from video-taped
sessions using the Countee application. The Countee application
is a mobile appli-
cation that allows for real-time data collection and development
of individual data

collection templates. Each individual template contained the
participants’ initials
and operational definitions of the target behaviors. The use of
the Countee applica-
tion allowed for analysis of latency to behavior during each
condition. Data during
Gabe’s FAs were collected using the Countee application rather
than the paper and
pencil method (which facilitated the latency analysis). Since
Spencer’s FA was not
video-taped, latency data are not available for his FA. Before
collecting primary or
reliability data, the observers trained on the data collection
procedures until they
reached 100% reliability for one session.
Interobserver Agreement
Two raters coded data using the Countee application for a
minimum of 25% of ses-
sions within each language for each participant (e.g., 25% of
English sessions for
Slater and 25% of Spanish sessions for Slater). The raw data
were transposed into
10-s intervals to allow for calculation of interobserver
agreement (IOA). The fourth
author calculated the IOA using percent agreement. An
agreement was scored if
both raters coded the same frequency of behavior during a 10-s
interval. A disa-
greement was scored if the raters did not score the same
frequency of behavior in
the 10-s interval. The fourth author then divided the number of
agreements by the
sum of the agreements and disagreements and multiplied by 100
to obtain a meas-

ure of IOA. The minimum resulting IOA across the participants
was 96.3% (range
90–100%; Jackie’s Spanish FA), and the maximum resulting
IOA was 100% (e.g.,
Slater’s English FA).
Experimenter Training and Procedural Fidelity
All of the research sessions were implemented by students
enrolled in a master’s
program who served as therapists at the outpatient clinics. The
FAs were overseen
by a Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA) or Board
Certified Behavior Ana-
lysts—Doctoral (BCBA-D). All of the experimenters were
trained prior to imple-
menting study sessions using behavioral skills training (i.e.,
verbal and written
instruction, modeling, role-play, and performance feedback).
All of the experiment-
ers were fluent in both English and Spanish.
1 3
In addition to training, two raters collected procedural fidelity
for a minimum of
85% of participant sessions for each assessment (e.g., 85% of
conditions for Jackie’s
English FA and 85% of the conditions for Jackie’s Spanish FA).
Raters collected
procedural fidelity using procedural task lists developed by the
lead author. Task

lists included the implementers’ adherence to study procedures
including mainte-
nance of establishing operations, presentation of discriminative
stimuli, prompting
procedures, and presentation of consequent variables.
The task lists contained between four and six expected
implementer behaviors
(depending on the FA condition). Raters coded a “1” if the
implementer behavior
occurred and a “0” if it was absent. The total was summed,
divided by the total
number of expected behaviors, and multiplied by 100 to obtain a
percentage. The
minimum resulting fidelity was 96.3% (range 75–100%; Elise’s
English FA), and the
maximum resulting IOA was 100% (e.g., Spencer’s English
FA).
Pre‑ Assessment of Receptive Language
To assess for fluency of receptive language, the experimenters
administered the
Woodcock Johnson Tests of Oral Language IV, the Picture
Vocabulary subtest (Eng-
lish), and the Vocabulario sobre dibujos (Spanish) subtest to
participants (Schrank,
McGrew, and Mather 2014). Unfortunately, engagement in
problem behavior
resulted in termination of the test for all participants.
Procedure
Experimental Design The experimenters conducted two
sequential FAs (one in each
language). The experimenters conducted the assessments using

an A-B design (“A”
representing the assessment in the first language and “B”
representing the assess-
ment in the second language). Each assessment was conducted
using an alternating
treatment designs embedded within each phase. The
presentation of language was
randomized with nine of the participants randomized to receive
the assessment in
the English language first and one participant randomized to
receive the assessment
in the Spanish language (i.e., Alex). The lead author
randomized the presentation of
the conditions within each assessment, and the sequence was
held consistent across
the two languages.
Functional analysis The experimenters designed the FAs
according to the pro-
cedures described by Neely et al. 2019 and adapted from
Rispoli and colleagues
(2011). Each FA included a test for social-positive
reinforcement (e.g., access to
attention), social-negative reinforcement (e.g., escape from
demands or social atten-
tion), and a control condition (e.g., non-vocal play condition).
The FAs for some of
the participants (i.e., Jackie, Alex, Carlos, Jeremy, Gabe, and
Alfonzo) also included
a second test for social-positive reinforcement in the form of
access to preferred toys
(e.g., access to tangibles) as this was indicated as a possible
function by their clinical
records. We did not include any test for automatically
maintained behavior as it was

1 3
not hypothesized for any of the target behaviors. The
experimenters wore colored
shirts during the assessments that corresponded to the condition
(e.g., blue for the
play control condition; Conners et al. 2000) to facilitate
discrimination across the
conditions. All vocal–verbal utterances made by the
experimenters were matched
for phonetic length (within one syllable) across the languages to
control for response
effort. The content of the vocal–verbal utterances was also held
constant. For exam-
ple, the experimenter might say “Do this” in the English
language (two syllabus)
and “Has esto” in the Spanish language (three syllables). The
experimenter was held
constant (i.e., the same experimenter implemented both the
English and the Spanish
FA for each participant).
Prior to initiating the assessments, the lead experimenter trained
the rest of
the research team on the FA protection procedures. For the
child, the following
was included or available during each session: (1) padding in
the form of mov-
able pads, (2) oversight by a doctoral level BCBA or onsite
BCBA, (3) on-site
physicians or nurses to respond to potential injury, and (4) skin
checks following

each session. For the experimenter, the following was included
or available dur-
ing each session: (1) protective clothing including arm and skin
guards, (2) train-
ing physical and crises management, (3) skin checks following
session, and (4)
weekly discussion with the lead experimenter to evaluate
assessment risk.
Attention condition The experimenter initiated an attention
condition by directing
the participant to preferred toys. The experimenter then stated
they needed to work
(i.e., “Tu juega, yo trabajaré” or “You play, I will be doing
work”), and removed
attention by looking down at their work and turning their body
slightly away from
the participant. The experimenter did not respond to any non-
target behavior. Con-
tingent on the target behavior, the experimenter turned toward
the child and pro-
vided brief vocal–verbal attention (e.g., brief physical touch and
a statement for a
fixed interval of 10 s).
Non-vocal play During the non-vocal play condition, the
participant had preferred
stimuli freely available. The experimenter engaged with the
participant following
their lead, responding to all appropriate social interactions with
non-vocal responses
(e.g., smiles, head nodding, tickles, or high-fives) and provided
attention on a fixed
interval schedule (e.g., 10 s) of the same quality and topography
(e.g., smiles, head
nodding, tickles, or high-fives). The experimenter did not

provide any consequences
for target behavior.
Escape During the escape condition, the experimenter provided
continuous pres-
entation of the aversive stimuli (academic instruction or social
attention as identi-
fied during the clinical intake process). Experimenter
vocalizations were matched
in response efforts and phonetic length (within one syllable)
across languages. If a
vocal–verbal response was indicated, participants were required
to respond in the
relevant language. Contingent on problem behavior, the
experimenter removed all
relevant stimuli and turned away for a fixed interval (e.g. 10 s).
Presentation of the
aversive stimuli was reintroduced following a fixed interval
without problem behav-
ior. The experimenter restarted the interval if problem behavior
occurred before the
1 3
interval elapsed. The procedures for escape from academic
instruction and social
attention were identical except, during presentation of academic
demands, a least-
to-most prompt hierarchy with an inter-prompt interval of 3 s
was utilized for the
presentation of the academic instruction.

Tangible During the tangible condition, the experimenter first
provided 30 s of
access to the preferred tangible. Preferred tangibles were
identified using either a
paired choice or multiple-stimulus with/without replacement
preference assessment
during the clinical intake process. After the brief access period,
the experimenter
retrieved the item and placed the item in sight but out of reach.
The experimenter
did not respond to any non-target behaviors (including attempts
to get the item).
Contingent upon the target behavior, the experimenter provided
access to the item
for 30 s. The tangible was retrieved after a fixed interval (e.g.,
10 s).
Data Analysis
Following completion of the ten FAs, the lead experimenter
recruited six BCBA-
Ds with experience implementing functional analyses to analyze
the resulting FA
graphs using visual analysis. The six BCBA-Ds independently
reviewed the graphs
and provided their conclusion regarding identified function.
Using the functions
identified by the BCBA-Ds, the first and fourth author analyzed
the data using
descriptive analysis and effect size analysis. The descriptive
analysis included cal-
culation of the average latency to behavior and average rate of
behavior during each
condition conducted within the respective FAs (e.g., Spanish
and English). The
experimenters also conducted an effect size analysis for the

identified functions
using Tau-U effect size (Parker et al. 2011). Tau-U is a robust
effect size that allows
for greater precision as compared to other nonparametric effect
sizes. Tau-U is also
consistent with visual analysis with demonstrated convergent
validity (Ninci et al.
2015). Data for each identified function were contrasted with
the play-control condi-
tion to calculate the corresponding effect size.
Results
The functional analysis graphs for Jackie, Alex, and Slater were
originally published
in Neely et al. 2019. However, the experimenters recoded the
videos to obtain rate of
behavior (with the exception of Jackie English session 2 and
Slater English session 6
as the files were corrupted). Therefore, the graphs for the all ten
cases are presented
in Fig. 1 (Jackie, Slater, Alex, Carlos, Jeremy, and Gabe #1)
and Fig. 2 (Gabe #2,
Elise, Alfonzo, and Spencer) Fig. 3.
Identification of Function and Correspondence of Function
The functions identified by the BCBA-Ds are presented in
Table 2. The BCBA-
Ds indicated that eight of the ten FAs demonstrated
correspondence of functions
1 3

between the languages. For multiple-function FAs, there was
some discrepancies of
identified functions with three of the BCBA-Ds indicating
correspondence of one
function but not the second function (e.g., BCBA-D#1 indicated
a tangible function
for Alfonzo in the English language and a tangible and escape
function in the Span-
ish section). All BCBA-Ds indicated that Spencer’s FAs results
did not correspond
across functions. For the purpose of analysis, the experimenters
adopted the func-
tions identified by the majority of the BCBA-Ds (i.e., 50% or
higher agreement).
Fig. 1 Functional analysis results in English and Spanish
languages for Jackie, Slater, and Alex
1 3
languages for Carlos, Jeremy, and Gabe
1 3
Descriptive Results

The lead experimenter and fourth author conducted the
descriptive analysis for each
graph. The data were analyzed for average rate of behavior for
each identified func-
tion, average latency to behavior for each identified function,
and effect size. The
results for the descriptive analysis are presented in Table 3.
For the first graph, Jackie engaged in elevated levels of
behaviors during the
English FA in the tangible condition (M = 4.2 behaviors/min;
range 3.2–4.6
behaviors/min) and escape condition (M = 5.0 behaviors/min;
range 3.6–6.2
behaviors/min), with behavior not observed in the attention and
non-vocal play
conditions. During the Spanish FA, Jackie engaged in elevated
levels of behav-
ior during the tangible condition (M = 5.1 behaviors/min; range
4.6–6 behaviors/
min) and escape condition (M = 5.2 behaviors/min; range 3.6–6
behaviors/min).
languages for Elise, Alfonzo, and Spencer
1 3
Ta
bl

e
2
R
es
ul
ts
o
f v
is
ua
l i
ns
pe
ct
io
n
an
d
id
en
tifi
ca
tio
n

of
fu
nc
tio
n
B
C
BA
-D
#
1
B
C
BA
-D
#
2
B
C
BA
-D
#
3
B

C
BA
-D
#
4
B
C
BA
-D
#
5
B
C
BA
-D
#
6
N
am
e
Fu
nc
tio
n

En
gl
is
h
Fu
nc
tio
n
Sp
an
is
h
Fu
nc
tio
n
En
gl
is
h
Fu
nc
tio
n

Sp
an
is
h
Fu
nc
tio
n
En
gl
is
h
Fu
nc
tio
n
Sp
an
is
h
Fu
nc
tio
n

Sp
an
is
h
Fu
nc
tio
n
En
gl
is
h
Fu
nc
tio
n
Sp
an
is
h
Ja
ck
ie
Ta

ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta

ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Sl

at
er
Es
ca
pe
Es
ca
pe
Es
ca
pe
Es
ca
pe
Es
ca
pe
Es
ca
pe
Es
ca
pe
Es

ca
pe
Es
ca
pe
Es
ca
pe
Es
ca
pe
Es
ca
pe
A
le
x
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib

le
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca

pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca

pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca

pe
C
ar
lo
s
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib

le
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
U
nc
le
ar
Ta
ng
ib

le
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
G
ab

e(
FA
1)
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le

Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le

Ta
ng
ib
le
G
ab
e(
FA
2)
Es
ca
pe
fro
m
at
te
nt
io
n
Es
ca

pe
fro
m
at
te
nt
io
n
Es
ca
pe
fro
m
at
te
nt
io
n
Es
ca

pe
fr
om
at
te
nt
io
n
El
is
e
A
cc
es
s t
o
R
R
B
A
cc
es
s t

o
R
R
B
A
cc
es
s t
o
R
R
B
A
cc
es
s t
o
R
R
B
A
cc
es
s t

o
R
R
B
A
cc
es
s t
o
R
R
B
A
lfo
nz
o
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le

es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le

es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe

Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe

Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Je
re
m
y
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le

es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
es
ca
pe
Sp
en
ce
r
In
co
nc
lu
-
si
ve
In

co
nc
lu
-
si
ve
In
co
nc
lu
-
si
ve
A
tte
nt
io
n
es
ca
pe
In
co
nc

lu
-
si
ve
A
tte
nt
io
n
es
ca
pe
In
co
nc
lu
-
si
ve
A
tte
nt
io
n

es
ca
pe
In
co
nc
lu
-
si
ve
A
tte
nt
io
n
A
tte
nt
io
n
es
ca
pe
A

tte
nt
io
n
es
ca
pe
1 3
Ta
bl
e
3
D
es
cr
ip
tiv
e
an
al
ys

is
N
am
e
Fu
nc
tio
n
En
gl
is
h
Fu
nc
tio
n
Sp
an
is
h
A
ve
ra
ge

R
at
e
En
gl
is
h
(b
eh
av
io
rs
/m
in
)
A
ve
ra
ge
R
at
e
Sp
an

is
h
(b
eh
av
io
rs
/m
in
)
A
ve
ra
ge
La
te
nc
y
En
gl
is
h
(s

)
A
ve
ra
ge
L
at
en
cy
Sp
an
is
h
(s
)
Ta
u-
U
En
gl
is
h
[C

I 9
0]
Ta
u-
U
Sp
an
is
h
[C
I 9
0]
Ja
ck
ie
Ta
ng
ib
le
Es
ca
pe
Ta
ng

ib
le
Es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 4
.2
Es
ca
pe
: 5
.0
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 5
.1
Es
ca

pe
: 5
.2
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 3
.7
Es
ca
pe
: 5
.4
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 2
.0
Es
ca
pe
: 2

.7
Ta
ng
ib
le
1
.0
[0
.3
, 1
]
Es
ca
pe
:1
.0
[0
.4
, 1
]
Ta
ng
ib
le

:1
.0
[0
.4
, 1
]
Es
ca
pe
:1
.0
[0
.4
, 1
]
Sl
at
er
Es
ca
pe
Es
ca
pe

5.
5
3.
6
15
.4
12
.8
1.
0
[0
.3
, 1
]
1.
0
[0
.4
, 1
]
A
le
x
Ta

ng
ib
le
Es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
Es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 4
.6
Es
ca
pe
: 1
.4

Ta
ng
ib
le
: 2
.7
Es
ca
pe
: 0
.9
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 0
.8
Es
ca
pe
: 3
7.
0
Ta

ng
ib
le
: 4
.6
Es
ca
pe
: 7
4.
9
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 1
.0
[0
.3
, 1
]
Es
ca
pe

: 1
.0
[0
.3
, 1
]
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 1
.0
[0
.4
, 1
]
Es
ca
pe
: 1
.0
[0
.4
, 1

]
C
ar
lo
s
Ta
ng
ib
le
Es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 1
.8
Es
ca

pe
: 1
.0
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 1
.0
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 1
68
.3
Es
ca
pe
: 1
99
.5
Ta
ng

ib
le
: 8
6.
2
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 0
.5
[-
0.
2,
1
]
Es
ca
pe
: 0
.6
[0
.0
, 1

]
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 0
.8
[0
.2
, 1
]
Je
re
m
y
Ta
ng
ib
le
Es
ca
pe
Ta
ng

ib
le
Es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 3
.4
Es
ca
pe
: 1
.6
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 4
.7
Es
ca

pe
: 1
.8
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 4
.6
Es
ca
pe
: 2
9.
3
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 6
.0
Es
ca
pe

: 5
4.
3
Ta
ng
ib
le
:1
.0
[0
.4
, 1
]
Es
ca
pe
: 1
.0
[0
.4
, 1
]
Ta
ng

ib
le
:1
.0
[0
.4
, 1
]
Es
ca
pe
: 0
.9
[0
.3
, 1
]
G
ab
e
(F
A
1
)

Ta
ng
ib
le
Ta
ng
ib
le
3.
0
4.
9
3.
1
2.
7
1.
0
[0
.2
, 1
]
1.
0

[0
.3
, 1
]
G
ab
e
(F
A
2
)
Es
ca
pe
fr
om
So
ci
al
A
tte
nt
io
n

Es
ca
pe
fr
om
So
ci
al
A
tte
n-
tio
n
1.
9
2.
0
6.
6
2.
6
1.
0

[0
.4
, 1
]
1.
0
[0
.4
, 1
]
El
is
e
A
cc
es
s t
o
R
R
B
A
cc
es

s t
o
R
R
B
2.
5
2.
7
4.
8
2.
9
1.
0
[0
.2
, 1
]
1.
0
[0
.2
, 1

]
A
lfo
nz
o
Ta
ng
ib
le
Es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
Es
ca
pe
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 5

.1
Es
ca
pe
: 1
.7
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 6
.8
Es
ca
pe
: 4
.8
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 4
.4
Es

ca
pe
: 1
32
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 3
.9
Es
ca
pe
: 5
7.
2
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 1
.0
[0
.4

, 1
]
Es
ca
pe
: 0
.6
[0
.0
, 1
]
Ta
ng
ib
le
: 1
.0
[0
.4
, 1
]
Es
ca
pe

: 1
.0
[0
.4
, 1
]
Sp
en
ce
r
In
co
nc
lu
si
ve
A
tte
nt
io
n
Es
ca
pe

N
/A
A
tte
nt
io
n:
1
.5
Es
ca
pe
: 1
.2
N
/A
N
ot
A
va
ila
bl
e
N

/A
Es
ca
pe
: 0
.9
[0
.2
, 1
]
A
tte
nt
io
n:
0
.8
[0
.1
, 1
]

1 3
Behaviors were not observed in the attention or non-vocal play
conditions. Both
the English FA and Spanish FA indicated a social-positive and
social-negative
function with behaviors occurring at a higher rate in the Spanish
FA. The average
latency to behavior was less in the Spanish FA (2.0 s during the
tangible condi-
tion and 2.7 s during the escape condition) than the English FA
(3.7 s during the
tangible condition and 5.4 s during the escape condition). The
Tau-U effect sizes
were all 1.0 indicating clear differentiation between the
identified function and
play-control condition.
Slater engaged in elevated levels of behaviors during the
English FA in the escape
condition (M = 5.5 behaviors/min; range 3.0–7.8
behaviors/min), with behavior not
observed in the attention and non-vocal play conditions. During
the Spanish FA,
Slater engaged in elevated levels of behavior during the escape
condition (M = 3.6
behaviors/min; range 2.4–4.6 behaviors/min), with behaviors
not observed in the
attention or non-vocal play conditions. While both the English
FA and Spanish FA
indicated a social-negative function, Slater had lower rates of
behavior in the Span-
ish FA. The average latency to behavior was less in the Spanish
FA (12.8 s during
the escape condition) than the English FA (15.4 s during the

escape condition). The
Tau-U effect sizes were all 1.0 indicating clear differentiation
between the identified
function and play-control condition.
During the English FA, Alex engaged in elevated levels of
behavior during the
tangible condition (M = 4.6 behaviors/min; range 3.4–5.6
behaviors/min) and escape
behaviors/min), with behaviors not
observed in the attention or non-vocal play conditions. Alex
engaged in elevated lev-
els of behaviors during the Spanish FA in the tangible condition
(M = 2.7 behaviors/
min; range 1.2–4.2 behaviors/min) and escape condition (M =
0.9 behaviors/min;
range 0.2–1.4 behaviors/min), with behavior not observed in the
attention and non-
vocal play conditions. While both the English FA and Spanish
FA indicated a social-
positive and social-negative function, the Spanish FA had lower
levels of behav-
ior across both the tangible and escape condition. The average
latency to behavior
was less in the English FA (0.8 s during the tangible condition
and 37.0 s during
the escape condition) than the Spanish FA (4.6 s during the
tangible condition and
74.9 s during the escape condition). The Tau-U effect sizes
were all 1.0 indicating
clear differentiation between the identified functions and play-
control condition.
Carlos engaged in elevated language during the English FA in
the tangible condi-

tion (M = 1.8 behaviors/min; range 0.0–4 behaviors/min) and
the escape condition
(M = 1.0 behaviors/min; range 0.0–3.2 behaviors/min), with low
levels of behav-
ior in the attention and non-vocal play conditions. During the
Spanish FA, Carlos
engaged in elevated levels of behavior during the tangible
condition (M = 1.0 behav-
iors/min; range 0.0–1.8 behaviors/min). Zero levels of behavior
were observed in
the attention, escape, and non-vocal play conditions. While the
English FA indi-
cated a social-positive and social-negative function, the Spanish
FA indicated only a
social-positive function. The average latency to behavior was
less in the Spanish FA
(86.2 s during the tangible condition) than the English FA
(168.3 s during the tan-
gible condition and 199.5 s during the escape condition). The
resulting Tau-U effect
sizes were 0.5 CI90 [− 0.2, 1] for the English tangible
condition and 0.6 CI90 [0.0,
1] for the English escape condition indicating some overlap
between the identified
1 3
functions and the play-control condition. The resulting Tau-U
effect size for the
Spanish tangible condition was 0.8 CI90 [0.2, 1] indicating
clear discrimination
between the identified function and the play-control condition.

Jeremy engaged in elevated levels of behaviors during the
English FA in the tan-
gible condition (M = 3.4 behaviors/min; range 3.0–3.8
behaviors/min), with very low lev-
els in one session of attention and zero levels in non-vocal play
conditions. During
the Spanish FA, Jeremy engaged in elevated levels of behavior
during the tangible
condition (M = 4.7 behaviors/min; range 4.0–5.4 behaviors/min)
and escape condi-
tion (M = 1.8 behaviors/min; range 0.2–4.6 behaviors/min),
with minimal behavior
in the attention and non-verbal play condition. Both the English
FA and Spanish
FA indicated a social-positive and social-negative function. The
average latency to
behavior was less in the English FA (4.6 s during the tangible
condition and 29.3 s
during the escape condition) than the Spanish FA (6.0 s during
the tangible condi-
tion and 54.3 s during the escape condition). The Tau-U effect
sizes between 0.9 and
1.0 indicating clear differentiation between the identified
functions and play-control
condition.
Gabe engaged in elevated levels of behaviors during the English
FA in the tan-
behaviors/min) with zero or
near zero levels of behavior in the attention, escape, and non-
vocal play conditions.
During the Spanish FA, Gabe engaged in elevated levels of

behavior during the tan-
behaviors/min) with near zero
to near zero levels in the attention, escape, and non-vocal play.
Both the English and
Spanish FA indicate a social-positive function with higher rates
of behavior in the
Spanish FA. The average latency to behavior was less in the
Spanish FA (2.7 s dur-
ing the tangible condition) than the English FA (3.1 s during the
tangible condition).
The Tau-U effect sizes were 1.0 indicating clear differentiation
between the identi-
fied functions and play-control condition.
In his second FA, Gabe engaged in elevated levels of behaviors
during the Eng-
lish FA in the escape from social attention condition (M = 1.9
behaviors/min; range
1.4–2.2 behaviors/min), with near zero levels of behavior in the
non-vocal play con-
ditions. During the Spanish FA, Gabe engaged in elevated levels
of behavior dur-
ing the escape from social attention condition (M = 2.0
behaviors/min; range 1.6–2.2
behaviors/min) with near zero levels in the non-vocal play.
Similar to his first FA,
in both the English and Spanish FA indicate a social-negative
function with similar
rates of behavior in both the English and Spanish FA. The
average latency to behav-
ior was less in the Spanish FA (2.6 s during the escape from
social attention condi-
tion) than the English FA (6.6 s during the escape from social
attention condition).
The Tau-U effect sizes were 1.0 indicating clear differentiation

between the identi-
fied functions and play-control condition.
Elise engaged in elevated levels of behaviors during the English
FA in the access
to restrictive and repetitive behavior condition (M = 2.5
behaviors/min; range
2.0–2.8 behaviors/min) with zero levels of behavior during non-
vocal play, escape,
and attention conditions. During the Spanish FA, Elise engaged
in elevated levels of
behavior during the access to restrictive and repetitive behavior
condition (M = 2.7
behaviors/min; range 2.6–3.0 behaviors/min) with zero levels in
the attention,
1 3
escape, and non-vocal play. In both, the English and Spanish FA
indicate a social-
positive function with similar rates of behavior in both the
English and Spanish FA.
The average latency to behavior was less in the Spanish FA
(2.9 s during the escape
from social attention condition) than the English FA (4.8 s
during the escape from
social attention condition). The Tau-U effect sizes were 1.0
indicating clear differen-
tiation between the identified functions and play-control
condition.
Alfonzo engaged in elevated levels of behaviors during the

English FA in the tan-
behaviors/min), with behavior
not observed in the attention and non-vocal play conditions.
During the Spanish
FA, Alfonzo engaged in elevated levels of behavior during the
tangible condition
(M = 6.8 behaviors/min; range 2.4–8.8 behaviors/min) and
escape condition (M = 4.8
behaviors/min; range 0.8–8.8 behaviors/min) with behaviors not
observed in the
attention or non-vocal play conditions. While both the English
FA and Spanish FA
indicated a social-positive and social-negative function, the
Spanish FA had higher
levels of behavior with more variability in the social negative
condition. The average
latency to behavior was less in the Spanish FA (3.9 s during the
tangible condition
and 57.2 s during the escape condition) than the English FA
(4.4 s during the tangi-
ble condition and 132 s during the escape condition). The Tau-U
effect sizes were
1.0 for the English tangible function, Spanish tangible function,
and Spanish escape
function indicating clear differentiation between the identified
functions and play-
control condition. The Tau-U effect size was 0.6 CI90 [− 0.03,
1.0] for the English
escape condition, indicating some data overlap between the
identified function and
the play-control condition.
The majority of the BCBA-Ds indicated that the results for

Spencer’s English
FA were inconclusive. During the Spanish FA, Spencer engaged
in elevated levels
of behavior during the attention condition (M = 1.5
behaviors/min; range 0.4–3.2
behaviors/min) and escape condition (M = 1.2 behaviors/min;
range 0.6–1.6 behav-
iors/min) with some behavior observed in the non-vocal play
condition (M = 0.3
behaviors/min; range 0.0–1.2 behaviors/min). The latency
analysis was not per-
formed for Spencer’s FA, as the FA was not videoed, and data
were originally col-
lected via paper and pencil (rather than the Countee
application). While the English
FA was inconclusive, the Spanish FA indicated a social-positive
and social-negative
function. The Tau-U effect sizes were 0.9 CI90 [0.18, 1] for the
Spanish escape and
0.8 CI90 [0.13, 1] for the Spanish attention indicating clear
differentiation between
the identified functions and play-control condition.
Discussion
The current study extends the FA literature by evaluating the
effects of language
(e.g., Spanish vs. English) for dual language learners (Lang
et al. 2011; Rispoli et al.
2011; Schlichenmeyer et al. 2013). Specifically, eight of the ten
FAs conducted in
this study showed correspondence of function across languages.
Results also indi-
cate differential rates of behavior and latencies to behavior
across languages. Taken
as a whole, these findings highlight the need to assess specific

cultural variables,
1 3
such as language, to ensure assessment of the relevant EOs.
Further, these results
extend previous research evaluating English and Spanish
conditions during an FA.
Of the ten FAs conducted, eight demonstrated correspondence
across languages.
These findings indicate that behavior may serve the same
function across languages
for some individuals from dual-language environments.
However, for two of the FAs
conducted in this study, the behavior function did not
correspond across language.
The differential findings are consistent with the findings of the
Rispoli et al. (2011)
and Lang et al. (2011) where different functions were observed
in the English lan-
guage as compared to the Spanish language. Differential results
may correlate with
participant fluency with each language and history of
reinforcement within each lan-
guage. For example, for those with corresponding results,
participant fluency and
history of reinforcement may have been equivalent in both
languages. Unfortunately,
that information was not available for the study participants.
Therefore, it is equally
possible that, for the participants which demonstrated

correspondence across lan-
guages, the participants may have attended to alternative
discriminative stimuli (e.g.,
color of shirts) and the language of implementation may not
have influenced the
assessment. These limitations might be considered for future
research.
When evaluating the behavior within each assessment, various
trends were noted
in terms of the different rates of problem behaviors observed.
For example, six of
the nine participants engaged in higher rates of behavior in the
Spanish FA as com-
pared to the English FA (e.g., Jackie, Jeremy, Gabe, Elise,
Alfonzo, & Spencer). The
latency to behavior was also faster in the Spanish than the
English FA for seven of
the ten FAs. One possible explanation could be that the
participants had a longer
reinforcement history in the Spanish versus the English
language. A second possible
explanation is that the participant learned the contingency and
responded accord-
ingly in the second FA (i.e., sequence effects). This would be
supported by Alex’s
assessment in which the English FA was conducted after the
Spanish FA. To note,
although Slater’s FA results indicate lower rate of behavior
during the Spanish as
compared to the English FA, Slater engaged in his topography
of behavior (bit-
ing) at a lower intensity but longer duration as the assessments
progressed (i.e., he
held the bite on the experimenters clothing). This may also
indicate he learned the

contingency.
The results regarding higher rates of behavior and shorter
latencies in the Span-
ish versus English language did not hold for all participants.
For example, Carlos’
FA results present an interesting case in that the behaviors
occurred at a lower rate
yet quicker latency in the Spanish condition (second FA) than
the English condition.
Anecdotally, Carlos did have a more advanced vocal–verbal
repertoire as compared
to the other participants. As Spanish was his primary language,
these results could
indicate a longer learning history in the Spanish language or a
preference for the
Spanish language (Aguilar et al. 2017). Alfonzo’s FA results
also present an interest-
ing case as his behavior during the escape condition in the
Spanish language was
variable and higher than the English FA. Perhaps Alfonzo had a
higher level of flu-
ency with the English language, and the demands were not as
difficult or aversive.
Similarly, Carlos had lower rates of behavior in the Spanish
escape condition, per-
haps signaling he was more fluent with the Spanish language
and demands were
not as difficult or aversive in that language. These subtle
differences highlight the
1 3

need for careful analysis in behavioral variations across
conditions. Given the dif-
ferent trends observed across the participants in the present
study, future research is
needed to evaluate larger Ns of participants to determine what
participant character-
istics and reinforcement histories might account for these
differences.
Although these findings provide an extension to the literature
by evaluating lan-
guage diversity, they are not without limitations. First, the
participant fluency with
each language and history of reinforcement within each
language was not assessed
prior to conducting the FAs. As these two factors could explain
the results, future
researchers might explicitly attempt to evaluate these factors
prior to conducting the
FAs. Second, the generalizability of these findings as they
relate to other languages
highlights the need for further extensions to this literature. In
the current study, we
had a fairly homogenous group of learners who were learning
Spanish and English
language. Thus, research evaluating other languages (e.g.,
Arabic, Chinese, Hindi,
etc.) of dual-language learners would be beneficial a greater
understanding of the
impacts of language diversity. Further, given the children
included in the current
study were not fully bilingual, research is needed to evaluate
the differences that
might be observed in learners who are more proficient in their
language repertoires.

Third, we chose to implement an A-B design, which does not
demonstrate experi-
mental control. In addition, the resulting randomization led to
only one participant
randomized to the Spanish language first. These design
constraints limit the strength
of the conclusions that can be drawn from this study. Future
research might fur-
ther this line of research and consider using a reversal design to
further evaluate the
impact of language on assessment results. However, a cost–
benefit analysis might
be considered to evaluate potential impacts on participants.
Finally, there is a lim-
ited research evaluating the effect of language on the treatment
of problem behav-
ior (Neely et al. 2019). Given the preliminary nature of this
study, future research
is needed that includes the effects of the treatment plans
developed to help fur-
ther evaluate the impacts of language on the assessment and
treatment of problem
behavior.
For practitioners, there are a few considerations that may
impact the efficacy of
our practice as it relates to language. This study highlights the
need to evaluate vari-
ations in rates of behavior identified during an FA and the
considerations that should
follow when developing treatment plans. For example, children
who show increased
rates of problem behavior in one language condition may also
show a preference of
language. Thus, it may be important for practitioners to
accounting for preference of

language and the behavioral impacts (i.e., increased rates or
intensity) to yield better
treatment efficacy (Aguilar et al. 2017).
As a field, we highlight the need for addressing socially valid
behaviors (Baer
et al. 1968; Brodhead et al. 2014). In recent years, several
researchers have high-
lighted the need for inclusion of inclusive practices (i.e.,
Brodhead et al. 2014; Fong
et al. 2017), the need for the inclusion of diversity in research
(i.e., Sinclair et al.
2018), and more specifically, understanding linguistic diversity
(Lim et al. 2018).
It is likely that the need for social validity should extended to
utilizing socially sig-
nificant assessments when working with individuals who are
dual language learners
(Lim et al. 2018). In doing so, behavior analysts will ensure
adherence to our ethics
code (BACB Ethical Compliance Code for Behavior Analysts
2015) by including
1 3
culturally responsive practices, which may also help to ensure
reliable assessment
findings. Becoming more aware of the implications of language
diversity may help
practitioners address more socially valid behaviors within the
treatment plans they
develop. In addition, future research might extend this research

by evaluating other
aspects of culture (e.g., cultural values) and the impact on
assessment results.
This extension provides a methodological framework for
linguistic analysis dur-
ing an FA, the evaluation of the impacts on problem behavior,
and highlights the
importance of the inclusion of linguistic diversity in the
assessment of problem
behavior. We recommend that the inclusion of linguistic
diversity in the analysis of
problem behavior becomes standard practice for the assessments
and treatments of
problem behavior.
Funding This article was not funded.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no
conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval This article complies with all ethical
requirements and was approved by the University
of Texas at San Antonio Institutional Review Board #16-247.
References
Aguilar, J. M., Chan, J. M., White, P. J., & Fragale, C. (2017).
Assessment of the language preferences
of five children with autism from Spanish-speaking homes.
Journal of Behavioral Education, 26,
334–347. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1086 4-017-9280-9
Baer, D., Wolf, M., & Risley, T. (1968). Some current

dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal
of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 91–97. https
://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1968.1-91
Brodhead, M. T., Durán, L., & Bloom, S. E. (2014). Cultural
and linguistic diversity in recent verbal
behavior research on individuals with disabilities: A review and
implications for research and prac-
tice. Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 30, 75–86. https
://doi.org/10.1007/s4061 6-014-0009-8
Conners, J., Iwata, B. A., Kahng, S. W., Hanley, G. P.,
Worsdell, A. S., & Thompson, R. H. (2000).
Differential responding in the presence and absence of
discriminative stimuli during multielement
functional analyses. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33,
299–308. https ://doi.org/10.1901/
jaba.2000.33-299
Fong, E. H., Ficklin, S., & Lee, H. Y. (2017). Increasing
cultural understanding and diversity in applied
behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis: Research and Practice,
17, 103–113. https ://doi.org/10.1037/
bar00 00076
Hanley, G. P., Iwata, B. A., & McCord, B. E. (2003). Functional
analysis of problem behavior: A review.
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 147–185. https
://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2003.36-147
Iwata, B., & Dozier, C. L. (2008). Clinical application of
functional analysis methodology. Behavior
Analysis in Practice, 1, 3–9. https ://doi.org/10.1007/BF033
91714
Lang, R., Rispoli, M., Sigafoos, J., et al. (2011). Effects of

language of instruction on response accuracy
and challenging behavior in a child with autism. Journal of
Behavioral Education, 20, 252–259.
https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1086 4-011-9130-0
Lim, N., O’Reilly, M. F., Sigafoos, J., & Lancioni, G. E.
(2018). Understanding the linguistic needs of
diverse individuals with autism spectrum disorder: Some
comments on the research literature and
suggestions for clinicians. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 48, 2890–2895. https ://
doi.org/10.1007/s1080 3-018-3532-y
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-017-9280-9
https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1968.1-91
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40616-014-0009-8
https://doi.org/10.1037/bar0000076
https://doi.org/10.1037/bar0000076
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03391714
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-011-9130-0
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3532-y
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3532-y
1 3
Neely, L., Graber, J., Kunnavatana, S., & Cantrell, K. (2019).
Impact of language on behavior assess-
ment and intervention outcomes. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, Online First. https ://doi.
org/10.1002/jaba.626

Ninci, J., Neely, L., Hong, E., Boles, M., Gilliland, W., Ganz,
J., & Vannest, K. J. (2015). Meta-analy-
sis of interventions to improve functional living skills for
people with autism spectrum disorder.
Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2,
184–198. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s4048
9-014-0046-1
Parker, R. I., Vannest, K. J., & Davis, J. L. (2011). Effect size
in single-case research: A review of nine
nonoverlap techniques. Behavior Modification, 35, 303–322.
https ://doi.org/10.1177/01454 45511
39914 7
Rispoli, M., O’Reilly, M., Lang, R., Sigafoos, J., Mulloy, A.,
Auilar, J., & Singer, G. (2011). Effects of
language of implementation on functional analysis outcomes.
Journal of Behavioral Education, 20,
224–232. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1086 4-011-9128-7
Schlichenmeyer, K. J., Roscoe, E. M., Rooker, G. W., Wheeler,
E. E., & Dube, W. V. (2013). Idiosyn-
cratic variables that affect functional analysis outcomes: A
review (2001–2010). Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 46, 339–348. https
://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.12
Sinclair, J., Hansen, S., Machalicek, W., Knowles, C., Hirano,
K. A., & Murray, C. (2018). A 16-year
review of participant diversity in intervention research across a
selection of 12 special education
journals. Exceptional Children, 84, 312–329. https
://doi.org/10.1177/00144 02918 75698 9
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to

jurisdictional claims in published
maps and institutional affiliations.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.626
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40489-014-0046-1
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40489-014-0046-1
https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445511399 147
https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445511399147
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-011-9128-7
https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402918756989Impact of Language
on Behavior Assessment
OutcomesAbstractIntroductionMethodParticipantsSettings
and MaterialsResponse Measurement and Interobserver
AgreementInterobserver AgreementExperimenter Training
and Procedural FidelityPre-Assessment of Receptive
LanguageProcedureData AnalysisResultsIdentification
of Function and Correspondence of FunctionDescriptive
ResultsDiscussionReferences
M4 Cultural Reflection
Please write one page (double spaced APA formatted) reflection
paper on the
Neely et al., 2020
Actions
. Some ideas for inclusion are:
1. Ways culture plays a role in behavior analysis and your daily
work.
2. The impact of culture and families, clients/students, and
other staff you work with.
3. Ways you can change your communication to become more
culturally responsive.
4. Interesting facts and concepts you learned from the reading
and how those facts you can apply to your job

6 Pages references not includedTOPIC How Culture plays a role i

6 Pages references not includedTOPIC How Culture plays a role i

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 6 Pages references not includedTOPIC How Culture plays a role i

Similar to 6 Pages references not includedTOPIC How Culture plays a role i (17)

More from milissaccm

More from milissaccm (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

6 Pages references not includedTOPIC How Culture plays a role i