of naturalistic observation is that it is time consuming. A second shortcoming of naturalistic observation is reactivity—that is, children might react to the fact that they are being observed and act in unnatural ways.
Figure 4.1 ■ Functional Analysis of Sara’s Behavior
Note: Functional analysis involves identifying the antecedents that elicit behavior problems and the consequences that maintain them over time. Based on Davison (2019).
Functional Analysis of Behavior
A functional analysis of behavior involves the identification of the antecedents and consequences of a child’s behavior based on either direct observation or detailed reports from others. Functional analysis is based on the notion that children’s behavior is purposeful—that is, their behavior serves a function (Kamphaus & Dever, 2018). In most cases, behavior serves to maximize rewards and minimize punishments. By carefully observing events that occur immediately before and immediately after a behavior, a clinician can determine the behavior’s purpose (Beavers, Iwata, & Lerman, 2013; Kratochwill, 2014).
To perform a functional analysis, the clinician operationally defines the child’s behavior problem in clear, observable terms. Next, the clinician gathers data regarding the antecedents and consequences of the target behavior. Antecedents refer to environmental conditions that immediately precede the behavior, whereas consequences refer to conditions that immediately follow the behavior and usually reinforce it. The clinician can use information about the antecedents and consequences of the child’s behavior to plan treatment (O’Brien, Haynes, & Kaholokula, 2015).
Let’s perform a functional analysis of Sara’s school refusal based on detailed reports from her mother (Figure 4.1). We can operationally define “school refusal” as Sara’s requests to avoid school because of at least one physical complaint (e.g., headache, nausea). Then, we will ask her mother to report the antecedents of her refusal. She says that Sara experiences physical problems only on school days (never on weekends) and only in the morning (never during school hours). Finally, we will try to identify the consequences of her refusal. How do her parents respond to her begging and tantrums? Her mother reports that she usually gives in to Sara’s requests and allows her to stay home. Her acquiescence quiets Sara, who tends to feel better by midday. These findings suggest that her mother’s decision to allow Sara to stay home negatively reinforces her behavior by allowing her to avoid an unpleasant stimulus (i.e., going to school). Consequently, Sara is more likely to refuse school in the future.
Review
Clinicians can observe children’s behavior during the diagnostic interview, while performing analog tasks at the clinic, or in naturalistic settings like school.
A functional analysis of behavior adopts the ABC model: (A) the antecedent that elicits the behavior, (B) the behavior itself, and (C) the consequence that maintains the behavior over time.
Clinicians can change children’s behavior by altering antecedents or consequences.
How Do Psychologists Assess Children’s Cognitive Functioning?
Intelligence
Children are often referred for testing because of questions regarding their cognitive functioning. For example, a parent might ask a psychologist to assess the intellectual abilities of a child with a developmental disability to determine the child’s cognitive strengths and weaknesses. A teacher might want to know if his struggling student has a learning disability. A physician might request testing for her patient who was involved in a bicycle accident and now experiences memory problems. In these cases, assessment will likely involve an intelligence test (Freeman & Chen, 2020).
Over the past century, considerable effort has gone into defining intelligence and developing tests to measure it. Nearly all theorists recognize that intelligence reflects some aspects of the person’s mental functioning that has its origins in genetics and biology but is shaped by education and experience. Albert Binet and Theodore Simon (1916), the developers of the first intelligence test, defined intelligence as the ability “to judge well, to comprehend well, and to reason well” (pp. 42–43). Years later, another important figure in the history of intelligence testing, David Wechsler (1958), described intelligence as “the capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment” (p. 7). Even more recently, John Carroll (1997) claimed that intelligence is “the degree to which, and the rate at which, people are able to learn and retain in long-term memory the knowledge and skills that can be learned from the environment, that is, what is taught in the home and in school, as well as things learned from everyday experience” (p. 44). Intelligence, therefore, is a broad construct that is related to people’s abilities to adapt to their environments, to solve problems, and to learn and use information accurately and efficiently (Snyderman & Rothman, 1987).
The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fifth Edition (WISC–V; Wechsler, Raiford, & Holdnack, 2014) is the most frequently used intelligence test for children and adolescents. Wechsler began developing tests in the 1930s in an attempt to measure facets of adults’ intelligence and problem-solving abilities. Later, he created a simplified version of his adult test to measure children’s intellectual functioning. The first version of the WISC was created in 1949; the most recent version is only a few years old. The test is appropriate for children between 6 and 16 years of age. The WISC–V consists of a series of short subtests that are individually administered to children, either in paper format or digitally (Table 4.2).
Table 4.2 ■ WISC–V Sample Items
The WISC–V yields a full scale IQ (FSIQ) score, an estimate of the child’s overall intelligence (Kaufman & Raiford, 2016). The FSIQ reflects the child’s performance on all domains of the test; therefore, it gives an overall picture of the child’s cognitive abilities. Very often, children show areas of strength and weakness that can be missed if we look only at their FSIQ. Consequently, most psychologists examine performance on the five WISC–V indices, or broad subscales, to obtain a more detailed picture of the child’s functioning. Here is a description of these indices:
Verbal comprehension reflects the child’s word knowledge and her ability to use verbal information to express herself and to solve word or story problems. Everyday tasks that require verbal comprehension include sharing facts and information, knowing the meaning of words and phrases, and understanding verbal analogies and stories.
Fluid reasoning reflects the child’s ability to solve novel, largely nonverbal problems; to detect underlying patterns or relationships among objects; and to engage in abstract thinking. Everyday tasks that require fluid reasoning include the ability to detect patterns in numbers or objects and to use abstract thought to solve new problems.
Visual–spatial reasoning reflects the child’s ability to attend, organize, and interpret visually presented material and to use visual information to solve immediate problems. Everyday tasks that involve visual–spatial reasoning include the ability to solve puzzles and mazes.
Working memory reflects the ability
