Jessel et al. (Behavior Analysis & Practice, 13(1), 205–216, 2020a) conducted a review of the functional analysis literature between the years 1965 and 2016. The authors found an increasing trend in analyses replicating the components of Iwata et al. (Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 197–209, 1982/1994a) and determined that those components have come to represent a standard format. Since the inception of the standard, other functional analysis formats (e.g., brief, latency-based, trial-based) have been developed to improve analysis efficiency and control, with most retaining fundamental components of the standard and some omitting all (e.g., interview-informed, synthesized contingency analysis; IISCA). We conducted a review of functional analyses in this two-part evaluation to determine the levels of efficiency and control afforded by functional analysis variations and formats.

杰塞尔等人。( Behavior Analysis & Practice, 13 (1), 205–216, 2020a) 对 1965 年至 2016 年间的功能分析文献进行了回顾。作者发现复制 Iwata 等人的成分的分析呈上升趋势。（应用行为分析杂志，27, 197–209, 1982/1994a) 并确定这些组件已经开始代表标准格式。自标准制定以来，已经开发了其他功能分析格式（例如，简短的、基于延迟的、基于试验的）以提高分析效率和控制，其中大多数保留了标准的基本组成部分，有些则省略了所有内容（例如，访谈-知情的综合应急分析；IISCA）。我们在这个由两部分组成的评估中对功能分析进行了审查，以确定功能分析变化和格式提供的效率和控制水平。