The current study examines anecdotal assessment, functional analysis, and treatment outcomes from 44 participants. Agreement across Motivation Assessment Scale (MAS), Questions About Behavioral Function (QABF), and Functional Analysis Screening Tool (FAST) assessments, agreement between those anecdotal assessments and functional analyses, and agreement between those anecdotal assessments and treatment outcomes were analyzed across maintaining variables and topography categories of challenging behaviors. Overall, the QABF had the highest agreement results with functional analyses and treatment with 70% and 92% of cases respectively. Patterns in the distribution of maintaining variables was examined across behavior topography categories.

Functional analyses are the gold standard of confirming maintaining variables of problem behavior. Despite widespread support, many clinical settings instead use anecdotal assessments. These have been shown to have poor reliability when used by non-experts but can be useful for confirming maintaining variables of problem behavior when agreement has reached a certain level. We used behavior skills training to teach new staff member pairs behavior function to increase their reliability on these assessments. We found that although agreement increased slightly, this was not clinically significant. Out of the two pairs of participants one pair of participants was able to identify their client's maintaining variable of problem behavior. Future research should investigate the type of training used for non-experts for example training non-experts to state problem behavior in objective operational terms.

The current study was designed to further evaluate the usefulness of anecdotal assessments. The goal of this study was to evaluate the overall agreement between multiple respondents on the primary function of aberrant behavior using the Motivation Assessment Scale (MAS) and the Functional Analysis Screening Tool (FAST) and, if agreement was obtained, to assess the effectiveness of treatment based on the outcome of the assessments. Results showed that anecdotal assessments were able to identify the general type of contingency maintaining two participants' problem behavior. However, for one participant the assessments did not correctly identify the specific form of reinforcement (attention or tangible items) that maintained the aberrant behavior.

Study 1 evaluated agreement among five respondents using the Functional Analysis Screening Tool (FAST), the Motivation Assessment Scale (MAS) and Questions About Behavioral Function (QABF). Respondents provided ratings for 20 target behaviors exhibited by 10 individuals. At least 4/5 raters agreed on the primary maintaining variable in 80% of cases with the FAST, 70% of cases with the MAS, and 55% of cases with the QABF. Study 2 evaluated correspondence between results of anecdotal assessments and experimental functional analysis for 10 target behaviors selected from Study 1. Correspondence between the experimental functional analyses was 60% with the FAST and the MAS, 50% with the QABF.

The current study was designed to evaluate the utility of progressing sequentially from multiple-respondent anecdotal assessments through test-control treatment analysis as an effective and efficient method of identifying the environmental determinants of problem behavior. the goal of the study was to evaluate overall agreement among multiple respondents on the primary function of aberrant behavior using the Motivation Assessment Scale (MAS) and Questions About Behavioral Function (QABF) and, if agreement was obtained, conduct a test-control evaluation to confirm anecdotal assessment findings while simultaneously evaluating the effects of function-based treatment. for 4 individuals, at least 4 of 5 respondents to the anecdotal assessments agreed (both within and across assessments) on the probable maintaining consequence for their problem behaviors. Test-control multielement evaluations were then conducted in which baseline sessions, corresponding to the suspected operant function of each individual’s problem behavior, were alternated with sessions in which the identified contingency was arranged for alternative behavior. Each evaluation showed substantial decreases in problem behavior and maintenance of alternative responses.

This paper examines the use of the anecdote in critical scholarship as an ethical approach to studying Aboriginal literature. As many scholars are now becoming aware of the damage that has been done to texts by critiquing Aboriginal literature from the position of cultural outsiders, this paper suggests that anecdotal theory proposed by Jane Gallop is an ethical approach to Aboriginal literature. The use of story to generate theory explored by Aboriginal scholars of literature is compared to anecdotal theory, which implies that the use of anecdotes is an ethical approach suggested by Aboriginal culture. Anecdotal theory, the practice of recording a personal anecdote and then reading it to generate theory, offers non-Aboriginal scholars as well as Aboriginal scholars a way to connect to the text. Using anecdotal theory helps scholars remain more responsible to the texts they are critiquing; anecdotes make scholars more self-aware and ground them in real experience, due to the anecdotes embodied nature and use of humour. This paper focuses on Aboriginal texts and scholars from North America. Helen Hoys critical work How Should I Read These: Native Women Writers in Canada is analysed for her use of the personal anecdote to examine its effectiveness. While Jane Gallop coins the term anecdotal theory, this paper attempts to connect personal anecdote, scholar, and literature in a way that Gallop does not.

This paper examines the use of the anecdote in critical scholarship as an ethical approach to studying Aboriginal literature. As many scholars are now becoming aware of the damage that has been done to texts by critiquing Aboriginal literature from the position of cultural outsiders, this paper suggests that anecdotal theory proposed by Jane Gallop is an ethical approach to Aboriginal literature. The use of story to generate theory explored by Aboriginal scholars of literature is compared to anecdotal theory, which implies that the use of anecdotes is an ethical approach suggested by Aboriginal culture. Anecdotal theory, the practice of recording a personal anecdote and then reading it to generate theory, offers non-Aboriginal scholars as well as Aboriginal scholars a way to connect to the text. Using anecdotal theory helps scholars remain more responsible to the texts they are critiquing; anecdotes make scholars more self-aware and ground them in real experience, due to the anecdotes embodied nature and use of humour. This paper focuses on Aboriginal texts and scholars from North America. Helen Hoys critical work How Should I Read These: Native Women Writers in Canada is analysed for her use of the personal anecdote to examine its effectiveness. While Jane Gallop coins the term anecdotal theory, this paper attempts to connect personal anecdote, scholar, and literature in a way that Gallop does not.

In this thesis, different ways to evaluate social business are compared and discussed.The relatively new concept “social business” is used to describe a private sector enterprise, the purpose of which is not primarily to maximise profit but to achieve a social mission. However, in doing so, it needs to be sustainable in financial terms, and this means that sufficient profitability is a necessary condition. (Environmental sustainability is another important prerequisite, which is not discussed in depth here).Assessing the success of a social business, it is therefore necessary to evaluate both the social impact and the financial viability. This means, on one hand, using appropriate evaluation methods that have mainly been developed for the public sector and the civil society. Such methods are based on unequal power relations requiring accountability – a concept not normally used in the private sector, where funding is based on a voluntary exchange of money for goods or services. On the other hand, not all traditional methods for assessing performance in a private sector company are suitable for determining financial sustainability in a social business. Nevertheless, existing methods should be used where appropriate.Among the findings are:- the importance of the local context and particular features, which makes comparisons between different social businesses difficult, and which necessitates adaptions of assessment methods- that several financial indicators, used for for-profit business, may also be useful for social business (especially those related to revenue trends and liquidity). However such indicators are based on accounting (history) rather than a forward-looking analysis of the business environment, and may not be fully comparable.- that the main purpose of impact evaluation is the need to improve operations, but also to enhance legitimacy among stake-holders and – to some extent – regulators and prospective investors. Stake-holder involvement is therefore normally an advantage.- that methods that build on monetising outcomes and impacts (for example Social Return on Investment) are normally less appropriate than models that use non-monetary forms for publishing evaluation results, eg. anecdotal analyses- that with the exception of evaluations done by the academia to increase knowledge, available resources will normally not be sufficient to carry out fully fledged external evaluations using methods to establish a counterfactual situation.The development of social business also challenges traditional economic assumptions of the profit maximising individual through introducing such concepts as solidarity, social capital and citizenship. The fact that in several ways, social business crosses the borderline between on one hand the private sector and on the other hand public sector and civil society makes it necessary for representatives from many different academic fields to cooperate closely in future research: economics, business administration, political and social scientists etc.

Magister Chirurgiae Dentium (MChD) / Anecdotal and controversial discussion has.always been prompted by the bias of the clinician in relation to whether teeth in the line of fracture should be extracted or retained. In recent years, it became evident to clinicians serving the Maxi 11ofaci aland Oral Surgery Clinic at Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town, that a tendency towards reta ining teeth in the 1ine of fractu re did not seem to increase the possi bility of infecti on, providing that circumspection was used. A retrospective analysis of these cases was conducted in order to determine the outcome of our treatment. An independent sample of the 151 patients were investigated in relation to age, sex predilection, the effect timing has on the outcome of treatment and the incidence of infection when teeth in the line of mandibular fracture were extracted or retained. The results of this study has shown that most of our patients were young (aged 20-29yrs) and therefore a tendency to retain teeth was found. In older patients, (aged 30-49yrs), the tendency was to extract teeth. Males presented more than females in a 3:1 ratio. Patients treated early « 24hrs) had most of their teeth retained while others treated after 7 days had their teeth extracted. The infecti on rate was 2 percent if teeth were retained and 5 percent if teeth were extracted. A1though the difference was not statistically significant, it appeared that the retenti on of teeth in the 1ine of fracture presented more advantages to both patient and clinician.

Client writing has been used in association with individual therapy for many years, but published research on its effectiveness is sparse. Such research could provide a potential tool for therapists, as well as expand scientific knowledge. This review includes all available reports on the topic of client writing in individual therapy. The studies fall into three general categories: the systematic, "experimental" studies; the anecdotal reports; and the didactic reports. All studies considered show some benefit from the use of client writing in therapy. Writing appears to be beneficial whether initiated by the client or directed by the therapist; beneficial to adolescents and adults of all ages; beneficial to hospitalized patients, clients in individual therapy, and to students in school counseling; beneficial with different forms of writing; beneficial with different types of therapy; and beneficial whether writing is the main focus of therapy or only an adjunctive process. However, the conclusion that client writing is beneficial is largely based on anecdotal reports from therapists who have accidentally stumbled on it. Much more systematic research is needed, beginning with a survey to determine how extensive is its use. Specific recommendations for research are made.