Vol. 1 No.

2
November 1998

Behavioral Assessment
José de Jesús Vargas Flores1and E.Joselina Ibáñez Reyes2
NATIONAL AUTONOMOUS UNIVERSITY OF MEXICO
IZTACALA CAMPUS

SUMMARY
The assessment is the beginning of any behavioral intervention, its function
it is to quantify and analyze behavior. Through this, it is determined
the diagnosis, which is, after all, what will guide the design
and implementation of treatment within clinical psychology. One of
the foundations of behavioral evaluation are that they eliminate the
labels and rather aims to determine the excesses
and behavioral deficits, as well as environmental stimuli. It
make a description of direct and indirect methods. Words
Key. Behavioral Assessment, Clinical Psychology, Diagnosis.

ABSTRACT

The assessment is the starting point of all behavioral intervention, its

function is quantity and analyze the behavior. It determines the
diagnostic, that is, finally, the one that will direct the design and the
realization of the treatment in clinical psychology. One of the
bases of the behavioral assessment, is the elimination of labels and
rather than it is directed to the determination of the behavioral excess and
deficits, further environmental stimulus. Methods direct and indirect
is described. Key words: Behavioral assessment, Clinical Psychology,
Diagnostic.

The objective of this work is to develop the topic of behavioral evaluation.

The intention is to develop the topic in general terms without referring to the
particularities of the same.

The evaluation is one of the most important parts that are carried out in the
behavior therapy. Its aim is to know and quantify in terms
accessible the patient's behavior. The evaluation is so important that if not
would be carried out properly, the therapist would never really know if their
therapy either worked or didn't. It is thanks to the evaluation process that we determine what
variables are those that are maintaining the inappropriate behavior. In this way,
the evaluation guides therapy during the early stages. When the
the evaluation is poorly conducted, it is possible that the therapy takes different paths to
the correct ones and do not resolve the patient's problem; we can even exacerbate it
for which we are being consulted.

The therapist in the clinical office has a series of instruments.

evaluation that will allow them to quantify and determine the variables of the
appropriate or inappropriate behavior of the patient. This body of instruments has
characteristics that ensure their reliability and validity. These
characteristics are fundamental in the evaluation process because to the extent that
they are reliable and valid, to that extent they will be useful.

By principle, we will address the point of the differentiation between the evaluation
behavioral and the traditional. We will later address the behavioral interview.
as the first evaluation instrument, since this is the first contact that is
he has with the patient. Immediately after, at the descriptive level, the
direct evaluation methods. Finally, we will look at indirect methods.

Differences Between Behavioral Assessment and Traditional Assessment

There are differences between the evaluation made with a point of view.
behavioral and that carried out from a traditional point of view. It is important to make
note these differences since depending on our theoretical orientation we will
to carry out our evaluation. This must be consistent with the underlying theory
that we propose as certain. Thus, a clinical psychologist oriented
Psychodynamically, an evaluation will be conducted based on projective tests.
of personality, etc. Likewise, a behaviorally oriented clinician
will carry out inventories, direct records, etc. A psychodynamic evaluation
will be able to guide the psychologist to establish a therapy based on psychoanalysis.
Similarly, an inventory will determine a behavioral deficit or excess in
which will also receive a behavioral treatment that will be applied to it
behavioral treatment as well. For this reason, it is important to determine with
What type of assessment we are going to carry out previously. It is conventionally done
following a pre-established framework as we have just described.

One might wonder what the differences are between these two forms.
of evaluation. The elucidation of these differences may make us more sensitive
about the advantages and disadvantages of each current.

There are basically three differences: (1) the theoretical framework; (2) the objective of the
evaluation (3) relationship between evaluation and treatment.

Golfried (1977) and Ciminero (1977) argue that the main difference that exists
between the two types of assessment is the theoretical framework. The dynamic current
It is considered that personality is made up of a series of traits. These are
hypothetical constructs that are determined through psychometric tests.
For example, at the moment we determine, through some test,
that the subject is 'aggressive', we are assuming that this trait is something like
a ghost or internal force that will determine the individual's action in almost all
the situations. This trait will act and drive the individual in their work, in their
home, or on the street. This individual's personality can be classified as
potentially "aggressive", which means we could be doing a
overgeneralization of a behavior across the entire behavioral universe and in all
the circumstances.

Unlike this point of view, the behavioral approach will be able to, through
some inventory or direct record, observe that the same subject behaves in
aggressive behavior towards certain environmental stimuli. This is due to the
learning in the face of other stimuli was surely different and determined by the
specific consequences. The behavioral approach does not talk about traits but about
probability of response to specific stimuli.

The dynamic people believe that behavior is just a symptom of the illness.
This disease is found in the interaction of psychic forces that are
unconscious. Therefore, they are not very interested in what behaviors are presented.
individuals do not know what their internal conflicts are at the unconscious level. Behavior
open matters to them insofar as it reflects such processes.

On the contrary, behavioral psychology is interested in behavior. Which is

determined by the environment, the genetic apparatus, and learning. It does not imply
unobservable internal states. Therefore, it is interested in measuring not only the behavior.
but also in response to which stimuli it occurs. Therefore, both types of evaluation
they seek different things and are essentially different.

The objective of the evaluation.

We saw that while the dynamic current seeks traits, the behavioral one seeks
situationally defined behaviors. Psychiatric classifications are based on
in the medical model of mental illness. It is assumed that if an individual is
categorized under a certain syndrome is because it meets characteristics that determine
this syndrome. The classification of diseases into syndromes is very useful in
medicine, however, is not as effective for behavioral problems. This is
because behavior is not determined by a hypothetical construct that influences it
individual and why classification does not help to determine what type of treatment
We must give it to the subject.
Behavioral orientation does not seek to group behaviors under labels. More
well, your intention is to determine what behavioral deficits or excesses the
subject regarding the important social norms at the moment. The
classification becomes simpler and easier to handle for carrying out the
appropriate treatment. In this way, the evaluation objectives of both
currents are totally different.

Relationship Between Evaluation and Treatment.

Dynamic assessment generally leads to a single treatment: the

Psychoanalysis for neurotics. It doesn't matter what type of problem the person presents.
patient the treatment will always be the same. Therefore, the usefulness of the
assessment is poor as it does not determine the specific treatment for the
problem. Generally, we do not find a relationship between the evaluation carried out
for standardized tests and the treatments carried out.

This does not happen in the behavioral current which is precisely the evaluation.
that directs the treatment. The relationship between evaluation and treatment is
directly. When we manage to determine based on what variables an event occurs
conduct. The modification of this variable is the solution to the problem. For
Assuming that the problem is not so simple, since at times it is not possible.
modify or determine a variable. Sometimes the variable is not external but rather more
internal well or an interaction of both. However, a good evaluation
will determine the achievement of the therapy objectives.

Taking into account the existing differences between the two orientations and their
From the respective evaluation, we can conclude that the utility of the behavioral is
determinant for the success of therapy. Furthermore, the assumptions of the
dynamic orientation does not convince to be used from this point
From the viewpoint, we observe the superiority of behavioral orientation.

Behavioral Interview

Within the clinical field, the interview is an important source of information.

In fact, due to the limitations of the clinical psychologist within the office,
We can affirm that the interview plays a key role in the evaluation.
It is during the interview that we get to know the patient, their general information, their
main problem and why this problem is caused. Sometimes, it is very
difficult to transfer to the real situation where the problem behavior occurs to
observe and record it. For example, sexual behavior, family interactions
specific, etc. (Bryant, Harvey, and Dang, 1998).
For the lego, it may seem the same to him a interview conducted by a
psychoanalyst than a behavioral psychologist. The questions may seem to you
the same, however, the objective is different. This point has been raised in
the previous section.

There are various formats of behavioral interviews (Kanfer and Phillips 1976;
Kanfer y Saslow 1969; Kanfer y Grim 1977; Lazarus, 1971; Golfried y Davison
1976). One of the earliest formulations of behavioral interview was made
by Kanfer and Sastow (1969). They formulate an interview guide that should cover
the following aspects:

Initial analysis of the problem situation.

2) Clarification of the problem situation (including an analysis of background and

external and internal consequences.

3) Motivational analysis.

4) Development analysis.

5) Self-control analysis.

6) Analysis of social relationships.

7) Analysis of the social, cultural, and physical environment.

This interview guide generally covers a more or less comprehensive analysis by

through which it is possible to make a therapeutic decision. It covers both the environment
internal as well as the external of the subject. In a later work, Kanfer and Grim (1977)
they update this interview guide trying to cover a wider range of
elements of which a schematic diagram will be shown:

Conduct Disorder.

a) Inadequate knowledge base for guiding behavior.

b) Failure in socially acceptable behaviors due to a deficit in skills.
c) Inability to control environmental influences and one's own behavior due to
means of self-directed responses.
d) Deficiencies in self-reinforcement.
e) Deficit in monitoring one's own behavior.
f) Inability to alter responses in conflict situations.
g) Limited repertoire of behavior due to a restricted range of reinforcers.
h) Deficit in cognitive and/or motor behaviors necessary to fulfill the
demands of daily life.
II. Behavioral Excesses.

a) Inappropriate conditioned anxiety to objects or events.

b) Excessive self-observation activity.

III. Problems in the Control of Environmental Stimuli.

a) Affective responses to stimulus objects or events directed at distress

subjective or unacceptable behavior.

b) Failure to provide support or opportunities for appropriate behavior in

different environments.
c) Failure to meet environmental demands or responsibilities arising from
a poor organization of time.

IV. Inappropriate Control of Self-Generated Stimuli.

a) Self-description that serves as a signal for behaviors aimed at results

negatives.

b) Verbal/symbolic activity that serves as a signal for inappropriate behavior.

c) Failure in the labeling of internal signals.

V. Inappropriate Contingency Arrangement.

a) Failure of the means to support appropriate behaviors.

b) Environmental maintenance of undesirable behavior.

c) Excessive use of positive reinforcement for desirable behaviors.
d) Independent reinforcement of the response.

As can be observed, this scheme is broader and more explicit than the previous one.
Consider both the environment and the subject. That is, both the stimuli that
they can provoke an inappropriate response, such as internal responses and
external to the subject.
Reliability in the Interview.

It is worth asking ourselves in the case of the interview if what the

patient is really true. To what extent can we trust the report of the
patient) and how can we be sure that what is reported is accurate? In order to
to resolve these questions, it is necessary to address two aspects: 1) sources of
reliability of the interview and; 2) ways to detect invalid data. These
Two aspects will be discussed very briefly.

Linehan (1977) says that trust in the information obtained during the
the interview rests on two assumptions: that the client is capable of observing and
report accurately your own behavior, environment, and environmental contingencies
behavior; and that reports these events accurately during the interview.

We start from the assumption that the client goes to the office because they have a
psychological and behavioral problem. To be able to solve this problem
He goes to a psychologist whom he will pay for their services. It is difficult for a
the person paid the psychologist just to have him listen to lies about his
problem. Then the patient is motivated to tell the psychologist his
problem for this to be solved. The psychologist must have sufficient skill
to ask questions that do not confuse the patient or create ambiguity.
The questions should be direct and clear. When the psychologist sits down
confused at one point, it should be raised to the patient in order to resolve it. If the patient
does not manage to clarify the point, the psychologist will try to get the patient to describe in
operational terms of their behavior.

There are several reasons why, despite the patient being motivated to
to tell your problem, it does not do so truthfully. One of the reasons is the
distrust towards the psychologist. It is possible that, in addition, they feel ashamed of the event and
does not feel capable of reporting it. For this, the psychologist must have the ability to
to provoke trust in the patient. It is possible to sign a contract for
confidentiality for greater peace of mind for your client. Another possible reason may
is the fact that the subject thinks that certain details are not important or
relevant to your problem. Even when you have observed accurately
its details, it is feasible that he forgets them at the moment because they seemed futile.
For this, the psychologist must explore these possible details carefully.
described by the patient. One way to do this is by playing a game of
papers of the situation and record the patient's thoughts during the
dynamic or immediately after. Another way is to make the client imagine the
situation and report the concurrent thoughts.
There are various ways to verify the data obtained during the interview.
A simple way to do this is to ask your family or friends about it.
of the patient report. However, this is not always possible. Another way to
Reliability is asking questions about the same topic and then going back.
to carry them out using other words. We can also relate all the
data obtained and being able to find some inconsistencies or details that do not
They must agree with each other. We must clarify these inconsistencies until we achieve being
satisfied with the truthfulness of the data.

A method that almost every psychologist uses intentionally or not is to observe the
changes in the patient's tone of voice and facial expression. Here we assume
that when a topic carries an emotional weight, it primarily affects the
tone of voice. For example, when we are asking routine questions, it is
it is possible for the patient to speak fluently, but when asked a certain question, they...
He finished his fluency, although later he tried to recover it. Here we can
to suspect two things, either that he told a lie or that he was excited to talk about it
theme. For either of the two reasons we must explore that point.

Direct Methods.

During the rise of behavior therapy that occurred in the late 1980s
In the 60s and early 70s, a large number of methods were generated
direct assessments. These assessment methods are usually carried out with the
direct observation of the subject's behavior, either in their natural environment or in
a simulated situation. They are usually carried out using paper and pencil noting
the occurrence or non-occurrence of behavior. We have, for example, within the
observational records: continuous recording, duration, by intervals,
sampling of time and planned activities. These records will not be described.
Since they are very well known and it would be tedious, it's better to refer to the sources.
bibliographic (for example, Vance Hall, 1973).

Direct records have very important methodological implications that

it is necessary to take into account. We mainly have two aspects: the
reliability and validity. Reliability refers to the fact that two observations
report that a certain behavior occurs, as well as the number of times it happens,
separate. That is, if a registrar says that they observed that a certain
the behavior occurred 15 times in a time interval of 1 minute; also another
registrar, making your observation independently reports the same
data or almost the same data. Reliability is the key point of the records
direct records, as a record with low reliability is of little use.

Validity refers to whether what we want to measure is really what

we want to measure. That is, for the record to be 'valid'. It may happen that our
The record may be reliable but not valid. That is why we must pay attention to
these two methodological aspects of the records.
 Self-monitoring measures.

Self-registration or self-monitoring involves the patient, through a

evaluative instrument, records its own behavior. This type of record arises
as an interesting alternative to assessment technology. We know that there is
behaviors that are very difficult to record in analogous situations within the
consultation room. Self-monitoring provides a good alternative to this problem. Nelson
(1977), states that a self-assessment tool, the therapist and the client
they jointly attempt to identify the meta behaviors that are to be modified; and the
second is when, once these behaviors have been identified, the
self-monitoring can serve by providing data that acts as a measure
dependent in clinical cases or research projects evaluating efficacy
of an intervention program.

One of the factors that must be taken into account in the case of self-monitoring
it is reactivity. In almost all forms of assessment there is some reactivity.
In almost all forms of evaluation, there is some reactivity; however, the
The form of evaluation that produces the most reactivity is self-monitoring. This high
reactivity is logical, since the individual is the recorder of their own
behavior. By being their own recorder, they realize whether their behavior occurs or not.
and how often. That is, there is an immediate feedback that can
inhibit or disinhibit behavior.

Nelson (1977) compiles and analyzes the variables that affect the
reactivity of self-monitoring. They will be mentioned and provided with a brief
explanation of each one.

Motivation. How motivated a subject is towards behavioral change.

it affects reactivity. For example, when a person self-monitors smoking, if
he really has the desire to eliminate this behavior, it will surely reduce his
frequency of self-monitoring.

Valencia. The valence of behavior also affects reactivity. That is, if the
behavior to be registered is considered as positive or negative. For example,
we can record the number of cigarettes consumed in a day (valencia
negative); or the number of times he managed to control smoking behavior (valence
positive). The behaviors positively evaluated tend to increase in their
frequency during self-monitoring, while the evaluated behaviors
They tend to decrease negatively.

Instructions from the Experimenter. The demands of the experimenter may

affect the direction of behavioral change during self-monitoring. For example
when the experimenter tells the subject to expect a positive change,
negative or neutral.

Nature of Behavior. This refers to whether the behavior is verbal or non-verbal.

engine, etc.
 Goals, Reinforcement, and Feedback. Depending on these three variables.
Behavior change occurs during self-monitoring.

Time. Self-recorded behavior has the property of being able to be observed.

before, during, and after the occurrence. The moment it is recorded,
it determines a large part of the reactivity. When there is greater reactivity, it is
when the recording is done before the behavior occurs; and the less reactivity
it is when the record is made after such occurrence. It depends on our
self-registration objectives to give the instruction at the moment of observation and
registration. For example, we can, for targeted therapeutic purposes, order that the
smoking must register first.

Nature of the Instrument. Here, the assessment instrument may be

inopportune for the execution of the behavior to be recorded. That is, when the
self-registration hinders behavior. For example, a wrist counter,
pencil record, etc. Each instrument, depending on the behavior that is
the registration may hinder. It has been observed that the devices that produce
More obstacles to behavior produce more reactivity.

Self-monitoring programming. Behavior can be recorded every time.

what happens every two times or every three. This programming groups the occurrence
of the behavior before being recorded, which also affects reactivity.

As can be seen, in this brief review, there are many sources of

reactivity of self-monitoring. These factors must be taken into account when addressing
to incorporate or use this evaluation system.

Analog Measurements.

Within the office, we have little opportunity to observe and record the
patient behavior. Direct records in the natural situation are very
useful and reliable but not very practical, plus they take a lot of time.
For this, the clinician has another element of direct records: the
analog measurements. These refer to those records we make in a
controlled environment. They can be performed in the office and use one or several
observers. If the situation allows, a video can also be recorded to
its registration and subsequent analysis.

Analog records have a few advantages worth mentioning.

example, they allow experimental control thereby producing validity
internal of a particular experiment. Also, at times, the problem
psychological is very complex to be studied directly. In this type of
Records assume that the subject will exhibit the same or almost the same behavior.
the same in the office as in real life. It is possible that this does not happen like this; without
embargo, what we can be sure of is whether the subject possesses or not the
skill within the behavioral repertoire.

The analogous methods used in clinical psychology are extensive. We have the
measurement of phobias in which the phobic situation or object is simulated in form
controlled; for example, a live snake is presented to it and we record the
patient behavior. One of the most used methods within this category
it's the role-playing game. In this case, the patient is presented with a situation
acting the therapist in the role of the person that disturbs him. He is asked to give
the response I would give in the real situation.

Role-playing is a very useful tool that is at the clinician's disposal.

It allows for taking many measures in a variety of simulated situations. Its
the most widespread use has been in measuring and training responses
social. These responses given in an interpersonal situation are generated in
a multitude of contexts. These range from husband-wife interaction, mother-
daughter, employee-boss, to the speaker-audience interaction. to carry out these
simulations can be used for therapist confederates to act and
the response to the patient. Usually, he is asked to describe the
situation that causes him anguish. The therapist helps him define and identify the
relevant stimuli. Taking this description into account, the situation is simulated.
emphasizing the relevant stimuli. Taking this description into account, it
simulate the situation emphasizing the relevant stimuli. The patient provides feedback.
about the therapist's performance, informing him about the accuracy or inaccuracy of the
situation related to reality. In turn, the therapist can make records
pencil and paper records, or have trained registrars available to them who
They can be hidden behind a Gessel camera for greater control.

There are also predetermined questionnaires in which the method is used.

evaluation analogy. We have, for example, the one developed by McFall and Marston
(1970). A tape recorder is used to present situations to the patient.
This must respond as if it were in the real situation. In this way, the
The therapist has time to make observations and records that are also already in place.
predetermined taking various components of assertive behavior.

Thus, analogous methods can be used by the therapist in a ...

improvised or structured. The therapist must decide whether to use one or the other.
depending on the situation and the advantages provided by the instrument of
measure at that moment. For example, when the patient presents for the first
When you go to therapy and the psychologist suspects a specific problem, they may use the
improvised form of the analog evaluation. Subsequently, once identified the
problem, you can use the structured form to conduct a more thorough evaluation
detained and deep.
Indirect Methods.

Indirect methods are used in therapy as a form of assessment.

alternatives when direct observation is not possible. There are behaviors that
which the subject does not present in a similar situation. For example, it cannot
smoke all the cigarettes he consumes in a day in front of the therapist; or it is
very difficult and embarrassing to have sexual intercourse inside the office. Of the
Indirect methods mainly include questionnaires and inventories.
(Ostrander, Weinfurt, Yarnold and August, 1998)

For the purposes of this work, we will take the definition of the use of methods.
indirect when the therapist is not the one making the record. Instead, it leaves
that others (mainly the patient) do it for him for practical reasons.

Questionnaires and Inventories.

We could differentiate a questionnaire from an inventory by the specificity of

both. That is, the questionnaire is more general and can touch on points.
specifically, the idea is to broadly understand the patient's problem(s).
In contrast, the inventory is more specific. Once the problem is defined, an attempt is made
elucidate it and explore it in more detail. However, there is no concept of
both measurement instruments that are fully accepted in the
behavioral literature, so it would not seem strange to find someone who disagrees
with these concepts.

The questionnaire and the inventory have the advantage that they can be given to the
patient so that they can solve them at each. In this way, it can be obtained
valuable information with minimal time loss on the part of the therapist.
It also has the advantage that since they are already made, the information is
systematic approach, making it easier to analyze. The main advantage of the
inventory lies precisely in its specificity. In this way, the therapist
You can make a quick, more or less detailed analysis of the problem.

Among the disadvantages we find, we have that sometimes the patient

does not fully understand the question and their answer may be confusing about
everything in open questions. This may be due to two things; it is possible that the
the question is poorly phrased and this causes confusion; or the patient has a
very low education to understand the question. In any case, the
the therapist has to analyze the data and corroborate the responses they have received
confusing similarities. This does not happen with inventories since in general
they contain a scale to answer and the questions are closed, which does not
subject to ambiguities.
 There are criticisms of questionnaires and inventories from psychometricians.
since statistical methods are not used to validate the instruments. There is a
negative reaction of behavioral psychologists against the use of statistics
in the tests. This reaction has reached such a degree that the rejection has been total.
It is possible that this reaction is more temperamental than rational. The misuse and the
abuse of statistics led to this reaction. Surely in the future, they will
will use more statistics to reinforce the reliability and validity of inventories and
questionnaires.

There is an almost infinite variety of questionnaires and inventories (Cautela and Upper,
1976; Walls, Werner, Bacon and Zane, 1977). This makes it possible to choose
comfortably the questionnaire and inventory that best suits our
momentary needs. A disadvantage that always occurs when the sources
originals are in English, it is the adaptation of these to the characteristics and
the idiosyncrasy of our country. This makes us think that it is necessary to generate
technology and behavioral research to avoid having to import them.

Conclusion.

Behavioral measurement has been developed based on theoretical principles.

that support it. One of the first rejections made by the evaluation
the behavioral towards the traditional is the number of inferences made by the latter
approach.

The first types of behavioral evaluation carried out were the measurements.
made directly in the natural environment. This generated an entire technology of
the direct measurement. Only with the emergence of cognitive orientation-
Behavioral self-monitoring has been more accepted. It is important to note.
that behavioral evaluation also makes inferences. It's just that these are from a
type different from those made by traditional evaluation. This type of inferences
are determined by the theoretical system of evaluation. With the approach
cognitive certain inferences are made such as responses that mediate the
stimulus-response relationship.

We can consider the evaluation of behavior in diapers. This is due to

that there are still technical and methodological problems to overcome. In the future
These problems will continue to be overcome little by little. However, it is
it is necessary to take these into account when performing the evaluation of patients for
make the least number of mistakes.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bryant R.A., Harvey A.G., and Dang S.T. (1998) Assessing acute stress disorder:
psychometric of a structured clinical interview. Psychological Assessment, 10,
(3), 215-220.

Cautela J.R. and Upper D. (1975) The process of individual behavior therapy. In M.
Hersen, R.M. Eisler and P.M. Miller (eds.) Progress in Behavior Modification, Vol.
I.New York: Academic Press.

Ciminero A.R. (1977) Behavioral Assessment: An overview. In A.R. Ciminero,

K.S. Calhoun and H.E. Adams (Eds.) Handbook of Behavioral Assessment.New
York: John Wiley and Sons.

Golfried M.R. and Davison G.C. (1976) Clinical Behavior Therapy. New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Golfried M.R. (1977) Behavioral Assessment and Perspective. In J.D. Cone and R.P.
Hawkins (Eds.) Behavioral Assessment: New Directions in Clinical
Psychology. New York: Brunner/Mazel.

Kanfer F.H. and Saslow G. (1969) Behavioral Diagnosis. In C.M. Franks (Ed.)
Behavior Therapy: Appraisal and Status. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Kanfer F.H. and Phillips J.S. (1976) Principles of Learning in Therapy

Behavior.Mexico: Trillas.

Kanfer F.H. and Grimm L.G. (1977) Behavioral Analysis: Selecting Target Behavior
in the Interviewing. Behavior Modification, 1,(1) 12-19.

Lazarus A.A. (1971) Behavior Therapy and Beyond. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Linehan M.M. (1977) Issues in Behavioral Interviewing. In J.D. Cone and R.P.
Hawkins (Eds.) Behavioral Assessment: New Directions in Clinical
Psychology. New York: Brunner/Mazel.

McFall R. M. and Marston A.R. (1970) An experimental investigation of behavior

Rehearsal in assertive training. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 76, 295-303.

Nelson R.O. (1977) Methodological Issues in Assessment Via Self-Monitoring.

J.D. Cone and R.P. Hawkins (Eds.) Behavioral Assessment: New Directions in
Clinical Psychology. New York: Brunner/Mazel.
Ostrander R., Weinfurt K.P., Yarnold P.R. and August G.J. (1998) Diagnosing
attention disorders with the behavioral assessment system for children and the
Child Behavior Checklist: Test and Construct Validity Analyses Using Optimal
discriminant classification trees. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology.
66.(4) 356-390.

Vance-Hall R. (1973) The Management of Behavior. The Teaching Model

Responsive.Mexico: Enterprises Inc.

Walls R.T., Werner T.J., Bacon A., and Zane T. (1977) Behavior Checklist. In J.D.
Cone and R.P. Hawkins (Eds.) Behavioral Assessment: New Directions in Clinical
Psychology. New York: Brunner/Mazel.