TOWARD THE DEVELOPMENT OF STRUCTURED CRITERIA FOR INTERPRETATION OF FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS DATA
Using functional analysis results to prescribe treatments is the preferred method for developing behavioral interventions. Little is known, however, about the reliability and validity of visual inspection for the interpretation of functional analysis data. The purpose of this investigation was to de...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of applied behavior analysis 1997, Vol.30 (2), p.313-326 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 326 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 313 |
| container_title | Journal of applied behavior analysis |
| container_volume | 30 |
| creator | Hagopian, Louis P. Fisher, Wayne W. Thompson, Rachel H. Owen-DeSchryver, Jamie Iwata, Brian A. Wacker, David P. |
| description | Using functional analysis results to prescribe treatments is the preferred method for developing behavioral interventions. Little is known, however, about the reliability and validity of visual inspection for the interpretation of functional analysis data. The purpose of this investigation was to develop a set of structured criteria for visual inspection of multielement functional analyses that, when applied correctly, would increase interrater agreement and agreement with interpretations reached by expert consensus. In Study 1, 3 predoctoral interns interpreted functional analysis graphs, and interrater agreement was low (M = .46). In Study 2, 64 functional analysis graphs were interpreted by a panel of experts, and then a set of structured criteria were developed that yielded interpretive results similar to those of the panel (exact agreement = .94). In Study 3, the 3 predoctoral interns from Study 1 were trained to use the structured criteria, and the mean interrater agreement coefficient increased to .81. The results suggest that (a) the interpretation of functional analysis data may be less reliable than is generally assumed, (b) decision‐making rules used by experts in the interpretation of functional analysis data can be operationalized, and (c) individuals can be trained to apply these rules accurately to increase interrater agreement. Potential uses of the criteria are discussed. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-313 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1284048</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>79117071</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5607-e7b7b87286595c8da1f57e21a513ec124c0ad2fd775150ce698f981a7c7fb8673</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkdFv0zAQhyMEGmXwzgtSBIi3DJ8dx84LUmjTLVNJqiRdQUKyHNcZKWkz4hbYf4-jVhUgIV7sk-77nXP5HOc5oAsIEbxdy0raKmQXBHkEyANnBCHhHmGIPHRGCGHwOKf0sfPEmDVCgFFAz5yzEAMiKBw5n8tsGeUTt7yK3Ul8E8-y-Yc4Ld1s6hZlvhiXizyeuOM8KeM8idxplrtJaut5HpdRmWTpQE4X6Xioo5kb2eNTkRTuJCqjp86jWrZGPzve585iGpfjK2-WXSbjaOYpGiDmaVaxijPMAxpSxVcSaso0BkmBaAXYV0iucL1ijAJFSgchr0MOkilWVzxg5Nx5d5h7t682eqX0dtfLVtz1zUb296KTjfizs22-iNvuuwDMfeRzO-DNcUDffdtrsxObxijdtnKru70RLARgiIEFX_4Frrt9v7XLCYwp8q0JYqFX_4LAh4CwgAXYUuhAqb4zptf16XsBiUGuGOSKQa4gSFi5NvLi9z1PgaNN23997EujZFv3cqsac8Iws_rxsG1wwH40rb7_77PiOnofYZ8O_9k7BBuz0z9PQdl_FdYCo2KZXoriuljepPOPYk5-AYn4xEs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1416376762</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>TOWARD THE DEVELOPMENT OF STRUCTURED CRITERIA FOR INTERPRETATION OF FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS DATA</title><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><source>PubMed Central Free</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>EBSCOhost Education Source</source><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><creator>Hagopian, Louis P. ; Fisher, Wayne W. ; Thompson, Rachel H. ; Owen-DeSchryver, Jamie ; Iwata, Brian A. ; Wacker, David P.</creator><creatorcontrib>Hagopian, Louis P. ; Fisher, Wayne W. ; Thompson, Rachel H. ; Owen-DeSchryver, Jamie ; Iwata, Brian A. ; Wacker, David P.</creatorcontrib><description>Using functional analysis results to prescribe treatments is the preferred method for developing behavioral interventions. Little is known, however, about the reliability and validity of visual inspection for the interpretation of functional analysis data. The purpose of this investigation was to develop a set of structured criteria for visual inspection of multielement functional analyses that, when applied correctly, would increase interrater agreement and agreement with interpretations reached by expert consensus. In Study 1, 3 predoctoral interns interpreted functional analysis graphs, and interrater agreement was low (M = .46). In Study 2, 64 functional analysis graphs were interpreted by a panel of experts, and then a set of structured criteria were developed that yielded interpretive results similar to those of the panel (exact agreement = .94). In Study 3, the 3 predoctoral interns from Study 1 were trained to use the structured criteria, and the mean interrater agreement coefficient increased to .81. The results suggest that (a) the interpretation of functional analysis data may be less reliable than is generally assumed, (b) decision‐making rules used by experts in the interpretation of functional analysis data can be operationalized, and (c) individuals can be trained to apply these rules accurately to increase interrater agreement. Potential uses of the criteria are discussed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8855</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-3703</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-313</identifier><identifier>PMID: 9210309</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JOABAW</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Agreements ; assessment ; Behavior ; Biological and medical sciences ; Decision making ; functional analysis ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Graphs ; Humans ; Inspection ; Intellectual Disability ; interrater agreement ; Interrater Reliability ; Mental Disorders - diagnosis ; Methodology. Experimentation ; Observer Variation ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychophysiology ; Psychometrics. Statistics. Methodology ; Random Allocation ; Rules ; Statistical analysis ; visual inspection</subject><ispartof>Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1997, Vol.30 (2), p.313-326</ispartof><rights>1997 Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior</rights><rights>1997 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, Incorporated Summer 1997</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5607-e7b7b87286595c8da1f57e21a513ec124c0ad2fd775150ce698f981a7c7fb8673</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5607-e7b7b87286595c8da1f57e21a513ec124c0ad2fd775150ce698f981a7c7fb8673</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1284048/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1284048/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,1417,27869,27924,27925,45574,45575,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=2712028$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9210309$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hagopian, Louis P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fisher, Wayne W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, Rachel H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Owen-DeSchryver, Jamie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iwata, Brian A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wacker, David P.</creatorcontrib><title>TOWARD THE DEVELOPMENT OF STRUCTURED CRITERIA FOR INTERPRETATION OF FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS DATA</title><title>Journal of applied behavior analysis</title><addtitle>J Appl Behav Anal</addtitle><description>Using functional analysis results to prescribe treatments is the preferred method for developing behavioral interventions. Little is known, however, about the reliability and validity of visual inspection for the interpretation of functional analysis data. The purpose of this investigation was to develop a set of structured criteria for visual inspection of multielement functional analyses that, when applied correctly, would increase interrater agreement and agreement with interpretations reached by expert consensus. In Study 1, 3 predoctoral interns interpreted functional analysis graphs, and interrater agreement was low (M = .46). In Study 2, 64 functional analysis graphs were interpreted by a panel of experts, and then a set of structured criteria were developed that yielded interpretive results similar to those of the panel (exact agreement = .94). In Study 3, the 3 predoctoral interns from Study 1 were trained to use the structured criteria, and the mean interrater agreement coefficient increased to .81. The results suggest that (a) the interpretation of functional analysis data may be less reliable than is generally assumed, (b) decision‐making rules used by experts in the interpretation of functional analysis data can be operationalized, and (c) individuals can be trained to apply these rules accurately to increase interrater agreement. Potential uses of the criteria are discussed.</description><subject>Agreements</subject><subject>assessment</subject><subject>Behavior</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>functional analysis</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Graphs</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Inspection</subject><subject>Intellectual Disability</subject><subject>interrater agreement</subject><subject>Interrater Reliability</subject><subject>Mental Disorders - diagnosis</subject><subject>Methodology. Experimentation</subject><subject>Observer Variation</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Psychometrics. Statistics. Methodology</subject><subject>Random Allocation</subject><subject>Rules</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>visual inspection</subject><issn>0021-8855</issn><issn>1938-3703</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1997</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>K30</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkdFv0zAQhyMEGmXwzgtSBIi3DJ8dx84LUmjTLVNJqiRdQUKyHNcZKWkz4hbYf4-jVhUgIV7sk-77nXP5HOc5oAsIEbxdy0raKmQXBHkEyANnBCHhHmGIPHRGCGHwOKf0sfPEmDVCgFFAz5yzEAMiKBw5n8tsGeUTt7yK3Ul8E8-y-Yc4Ld1s6hZlvhiXizyeuOM8KeM8idxplrtJaut5HpdRmWTpQE4X6Xioo5kb2eNTkRTuJCqjp86jWrZGPzve585iGpfjK2-WXSbjaOYpGiDmaVaxijPMAxpSxVcSaso0BkmBaAXYV0iucL1ijAJFSgchr0MOkilWVzxg5Nx5d5h7t682eqX0dtfLVtz1zUb296KTjfizs22-iNvuuwDMfeRzO-DNcUDffdtrsxObxijdtnKru70RLARgiIEFX_4Frrt9v7XLCYwp8q0JYqFX_4LAh4CwgAXYUuhAqb4zptf16XsBiUGuGOSKQa4gSFi5NvLi9z1PgaNN23997EujZFv3cqsac8Iws_rxsG1wwH40rb7_77PiOnofYZ8O_9k7BBuz0z9PQdl_FdYCo2KZXoriuljepPOPYk5-AYn4xEs</recordid><startdate>1997</startdate><enddate>1997</enddate><creator>Hagopian, Louis P.</creator><creator>Fisher, Wayne W.</creator><creator>Thompson, Rachel H.</creator><creator>Owen-DeSchryver, Jamie</creator><creator>Iwata, Brian A.</creator><creator>Wacker, David P.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>JRZRW</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope><scope>SFNNT</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>1997</creationdate><title>TOWARD THE DEVELOPMENT OF STRUCTURED CRITERIA FOR INTERPRETATION OF FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS DATA</title><author>Hagopian, Louis P. ; Fisher, Wayne W. ; Thompson, Rachel H. ; Owen-DeSchryver, Jamie ; Iwata, Brian A. ; Wacker, David P.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5607-e7b7b87286595c8da1f57e21a513ec124c0ad2fd775150ce698f981a7c7fb8673</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1997</creationdate><topic>Agreements</topic><topic>assessment</topic><topic>Behavior</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>functional analysis</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Graphs</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Inspection</topic><topic>Intellectual Disability</topic><topic>interrater agreement</topic><topic>Interrater Reliability</topic><topic>Mental Disorders - diagnosis</topic><topic>Methodology. Experimentation</topic><topic>Observer Variation</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Psychometrics. Statistics. Methodology</topic><topic>Random Allocation</topic><topic>Rules</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>visual inspection</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hagopian, Louis P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fisher, Wayne W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, Rachel H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Owen-DeSchryver, Jamie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iwata, Brian A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wacker, David P.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 35</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 44</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of applied behavior analysis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hagopian, Louis P.</au><au>Fisher, Wayne W.</au><au>Thompson, Rachel H.</au><au>Owen-DeSchryver, Jamie</au><au>Iwata, Brian A.</au><au>Wacker, David P.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>TOWARD THE DEVELOPMENT OF STRUCTURED CRITERIA FOR INTERPRETATION OF FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS DATA</atitle><jtitle>Journal of applied behavior analysis</jtitle><addtitle>J Appl Behav Anal</addtitle><date>1997</date><risdate>1997</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>313</spage><epage>326</epage><pages>313-326</pages><issn>0021-8855</issn><eissn>1938-3703</eissn><coden>JOABAW</coden><abstract>Using functional analysis results to prescribe treatments is the preferred method for developing behavioral interventions. Little is known, however, about the reliability and validity of visual inspection for the interpretation of functional analysis data. The purpose of this investigation was to develop a set of structured criteria for visual inspection of multielement functional analyses that, when applied correctly, would increase interrater agreement and agreement with interpretations reached by expert consensus. In Study 1, 3 predoctoral interns interpreted functional analysis graphs, and interrater agreement was low (M = .46). In Study 2, 64 functional analysis graphs were interpreted by a panel of experts, and then a set of structured criteria were developed that yielded interpretive results similar to those of the panel (exact agreement = .94). In Study 3, the 3 predoctoral interns from Study 1 were trained to use the structured criteria, and the mean interrater agreement coefficient increased to .81. The results suggest that (a) the interpretation of functional analysis data may be less reliable than is generally assumed, (b) decision‐making rules used by experts in the interpretation of functional analysis data can be operationalized, and (c) individuals can be trained to apply these rules accurately to increase interrater agreement. Potential uses of the criteria are discussed.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>9210309</pmid><doi>10.1901/jaba.1997.30-313</doi><tpages>14</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0021-8855 |
| ispartof | Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1997, Vol.30 (2), p.313-326 |
| issn | 0021-8855 1938-3703 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1284048 |
| source | Access via Wiley Online Library; PubMed Central Free; MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; EBSCOhost Education Source; Periodicals Index Online |
| subjects | Agreements assessment Behavior Biological and medical sciences Decision making functional analysis Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Graphs Humans Inspection Intellectual Disability interrater agreement Interrater Reliability Mental Disorders - diagnosis Methodology. Experimentation Observer Variation Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Psychology. Psychophysiology Psychometrics. Statistics. Methodology Random Allocation Rules Statistical analysis visual inspection |
| title | TOWARD THE DEVELOPMENT OF STRUCTURED CRITERIA FOR INTERPRETATION OF FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS DATA |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T14%3A30%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=TOWARD%20THE%20DEVELOPMENT%20OF%20STRUCTURED%20CRITERIA%20FOR%20INTERPRETATION%20OF%20FUNCTIONAL%20ANALYSIS%20DATA&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20applied%20behavior%20analysis&rft.au=Hagopian,%20Louis%20P.&rft.date=1997&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=313&rft.epage=326&rft.pages=313-326&rft.issn=0021-8855&rft.eissn=1938-3703&rft.coden=JOABAW&rft_id=info:doi/10.1901/jaba.1997.30-313&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E79117071%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1416376762&rft_id=info:pmid/9210309&rfr_iscdi=true |