Recent research on functional analyses (FAs) has examined the extent to which problem behavior is maintained by single (isolated) or combined (synthesized) reinforcement contingencies. Outcomes of these analyses might differ depending on the sources of information that are used to inform contingencies included in test conditions. The purpose of the current study was to compare the outcomes of isolated FAs and synthesized contingency analyses (SCAs) with 3 participants. Conditions in both analyses were informed by interviews and both unstructured and structured observations. Problem behavior for all 3 participants was maintained by 1 or 2 isolated reinforcers. Results suggested false-positive SCA results for 2 participants. For 1 participant, a second isolated reinforcer was identified following the SCA, indicating the induction of a novel function. Implications for the use of isolated and synthesized consequences are discussed, as well as the predictive validity of the assessments that are used to inform them.

中文翻译：

---

功能分析中孤立和综合意外事件的进一步比较

最近对功能分析 (FAs) 的研究已经检查了问题行为在多大程度上是由单一（孤立的）或组合的（综合的）强化意外事件维持的。这些分析的结果可能会有所不同，具体取决于用于告知测试条件中包含的意外事件的信息来源。本研究的目的是与 3 名参与者比较孤立 FA 和综合应急分析 (SCA) 的结果。两种分析中的条件都是通过访谈以及非结构化和结构化观察来了解的。所有 3 名参与者的问题行为由 1 或 2 个孤立的强化物维持。结果表明 2 名参与者的 SCA 结果为假阳性。对于 1 名参与者，在 SCA 之后确定了第二个孤立的强化物，表明诱导了一种新功能。