Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 838

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

THE FUNCTIONS OF SELF‐INJURIOUS BEHAVIOR: AN EXPERIMENTAL‐EPIDEMIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS

Open access
Iwata, Brian A., Pace, Gary M., Dorsey, Michael F., Zarcone, Jennifer R., Vollmer, Timothy R., Smith, Richard G., Rodgers, Teresa A., Lerman, Dorothea C., Shore, Bridget A., Mazaleski, Jodi L., Goh, Han‐Leong, Cowdery, Glynnis Edwards, Kalsher, Michael J., McCosh, Kay C., Willis, Kimberly D.·1994·Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis

Abstract

Data are summarized from 152 single‐subject analyses of the reinforcing functions of self‐injurious behavior (SIB). Individuals with developmental disabilities referred for assessment and/or treatment over an 11‐year period were exposed to a series of conditions in which the effects of antecedent and consequent events on SIB were examined systematically by way of multielement, reversal, or combined designs. Data were collected during approximately 4,000 experimental sessions (1,000 hr), with the length of assessment for individuals ranging from 8 to 66 sessions (M = 26.2) conducted over 2 to 16.5 hr (M = 6.5). Differential or uniformly high responding was observed in 145 (95.4%) of the cases. Social‐negative reinforcement (escape from task demands or other sources of aversive stimulation) accounted for 58 cases, which was the largest proportion of the sample (38.1%). Social‐positive reinforcement (either attention or access to food or materials) accounted for 40 (26.3%) of the cases, automatic (sensory) reinforcement accounted for 39 (25.7%), and multiple controlling variables accounted for 8 (5.3%). Seven sets of data (4.6%) showed either cyclical or inconsistent patterns of responding that were uninterpretable. Overall results indicated that functional analysis methodologies are extremely effective in identifying the environmental determinants of SIB on an individual basis and, subsequently, in guiding the process of treatment selection. Furthermore, an accumulation of assessment data from such analyses across a large number of individuals provides perhaps the most rigorous approach to an epidemiological study of behavioral function.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-215

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 838

Metadata

Authors
Iwata, B. A., Pace, G. M., Dorsey, M. F., Zarcone, J. R., Vollmer, T. R., Smith, R. G., Rodgers, T. A., Lerman, D. C., Shore, B. A., Mazaleski, J. L., Goh, H., Cowdery, G. E., Kalsher, M. J., McCosh, K. C., & Willis, K. D.
Venue
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1994-06
Volume
27
Issue
2
Pages
215-240
ISSN
  • 0021-8855 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-3703
OpenAlex
W2125814492
Cited by
838
References
0
FWCI
34.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: THE FUNCTIONS OF SELF‐INJURIOUS BEHAVIOR: AN EXPERIMENTAL‐EPIDEMIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1901/jaba.1994.27-215
The paper
Iwata, B. A., Pace, G. M., Dorsey, M. F., Zarcone, J. R., Vollmer, T. R., Smith, R. G., Rodgers, T. A., Lerman, D. C., Shore, B. A., Mazaleski, J. L., Goh, H., Cowdery, G. E., Kalsher, M. J., McCosh, K. C., & Willis, K. D. (1994). THE FUNCTIONS OF SELF‐INJURIOUS BEHAVIOR: AN EXPERIMENTAL‐EPIDEMIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1994.27-215

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.