When results of descriptive functional behavior assessments (FBAs) are inconclusive, experimental analysis methods can be used to directly test hypotheses about when or why a student engages in challenging behavior. Despite growing research on practical variations of hypothesis testing in schools, these methods are rarely incorporated in FBAs in practice. To inform practitioner perspectives on hypothesis testing as a component of FBAs, we surveyed a statewide sample of school practitioners who participate in the FBA process (n = 253). The survey addressed their views on three hypothesis testing strategies (i.e., functional analysis, antecedent analysis, concurrent operant analysis) across several dimensions. On 5-point Likert type scales, participants rated acceptability of procedures, feasibility of implementation, utility of results, conditions in which they would likely use or recommend the strategy, and perceived barriers. We used descriptive and nonparametric statistical analyses to compare ratings among the three hypothesis testing strategies. The majority of participants rated all three strategies favorably with respect to utility. However, ratings on acceptability, feasibility, and barriers were differentiated and favored the concurrent operant analysis over the functional and antecedent analyses. We discuss implications for practice and future research on incorporating hypothesis testing in FBAs for students with persistent challenging behavior.

当描述性功能行为评估 (FBA) 的结果没有定论时，可以使用实验分析方法来直接测试有关学生何时或为何从事具有挑战性的行为的假设。尽管对学校假设检验的实际变化的研究越来越多，但这些方法在实践中很少被纳入 FBA。为了告知从业者对作为 FBA 组成部分的假设检验的看法，我们调查了全州范围内参与 FBA 流程的学校从业者样本（n = 253）。该调查从多个维度阐述了他们对三种假设检验策略（即功能分析、前因分析、并发操作分析）的看法。在李克特 5 点量表上，参与者对程序的可接受性、实施的可行性、结果的效用、他们可能使用或推荐该策略的条件以及感知的障碍进行评分。我们使用描述性和非参数统计分析来比较三种假设检验策略之间的评级。大多数参与者在效用方面对所有三种策略都给予了好评。然而，对可接受性、可行性和障碍的评级是有区别的，并且有利于并发操作分析而不是功能分析和先行分析。