A COMPARISON OF MOMENTARY TIME SAMPLING AND PARTIAL‐INTERVAL RECORDING FOR EVALUATING FUNCTIONAL RELATIONS

Abstract

In the current study, momentary time sampling (MTS) and partial‐interval recording (PIR) were compared to continuous‐duration recording of stereotypy and to the frequency of self‐injury during a treatment analysis to determine whether the recording method affected data interpretation. Five previously conducted treatment analysis data sets were analyzed by creating separate graphic displays for each measurement method (duration or frequency, MTS, and PIR). An expert panel interview and structured criterion visual inspection were used to evaluate treatment effects across measurement methods. Results showed that treatment analysis interpretations based on both discontinuous recording methods often matched those based on frequency or duration recording; however, interpretations based on MTS were slightly more likely to match those based on duration and those based on PIR were slightly more likely to match those based on frequency.