Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

BEHP 5012 Units 1-9 Mine > 6-fundamentals of single case experimental design ll > Flashcards

6-fundamentals of single case experimental design ll Flashcards

1
Q

Based on an AB design, but the treatment phase is DIVIDED into subphases

Each sub phase involves a DIFFERENT behavioral CRITERION i.e., a different value of the IV

CRITERION in each subphase more closely resembles the TERMINAL behavior GOAL

A

Changing Criterion Design: procedure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Each sub phase provides:

  1. A means to gauge the effects of changing the IV value from the PREVIOUS phase
    • REPLICATES the effects of changing the IV value
  2. A baseline for the FOLLOWING phase
    PREDICTION if no other change in the IV is made
A

Changing criterion design: logic

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Experimental CONTROL is demonstrated when performance closely matches the specified criteria:

UNLIKELY that an EXTRANEOUS variable produced the change across conditions if the behavior changes when and ONLY  when a NEW criterion is ??
A

Changing criterion design: CONTROL

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Do you need perfect correspondence with criteria to show experimental control?

A

NO…
-Examine mean SHIFT to determine if it shows STEP-WISE changes

Examine PERCENTAGE of points that meet criterion

(Changing criterion Design: evaluation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Implement BI-DIRECTIONAL changes to BOLSTER demonstration of experimental control

- Changing criteria to a PREVIOUS subphase  VALUE and observing if that behavior reverts to that criteria
 - /Rules out THREATS such as MATURATION  and PRACTICE effects
A

Bi-Directional criteria… Changing criteria

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Number of criterion changes
At minimum, TWO, otherwise an AB design
- Too many changes, to rapidly, may OBSCURE orderly EFFECTS

A

Changing criterion: number of phases

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

As always, determined by STABILITY (again each sub phase acts as baseline for the next phase)

Phases can be shorter if behavior can change rapidly

LENGTH of phases should VARY- an additional demonstration of control: you change or keep behavior at a given level for as long or as briefly as you can

A

Changing criterion: PHASE LENGTH (I.e., session per phase)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

SMALL, INITIAL criterion changes maximize Probability of success, but…
If too small, why not be able to detect CHANGES IN BEHAVIOR
If too LARGE, may be difficult for the subject to
MEET CRITERIA

Rule of thumb: SMALL changes for a very STABLE behaviors, LARGER changes for VARIABLE behaviors

A

Changing criterion: degree of change.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

SMALL changes for very STABLE behaviors, LARGER changes for variable behavior

A

Rule of thumb: changing criterion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Treatments do NOT have to be WITHDRAWN. (relative to reversal designs)

Does NOT require multiple behaviors, subjects, or settings (relative to multiple baseline)

All subjects can receive TREATMENTS after the SAME length of baseline

A

Changing criterion: advantages

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Requires considerable TIME and EFFORT in planning
Phase length, degree of change, phase number should be planned in advance

Difficult to INTERPRET when behavior does NOT closely MATCH criteria
What if behavior drops to zero during first criterion change? Where is the experimental control?

A

Changing criterion: limitations

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Use when it is meaningful to MEASURE behavior change in STEPWISE increments

E.g., NUMBER of products such as cigarettes smoked: math problems completed; connecting links in a behavioral chain

Use to demonstrate experimental CONTROL during FADING and SHAPING procedures.

A

Changing criterion use

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Also known as:
SIMULTANEOUS treatment design – but not really simultaneous
CONCURRENT schedule design – but unlike a concurrent schedule of reinforcement
Multiple SCHEDULE design – but not necessarily like a multiple schedule
MULTIELEMENT design

A

Alternating Treatment Design BUT NOT Necessarily TREATMENTS

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Rapid ALTERNATION of two or more IVs or LEVELS of the independent variable

Each session may be a different condition

REPEATED measurement of behavior while the conditions alternate RAPIDLY

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES continue alternating INDEPENDENT of the level of responding

No WAITING for STEADY state
A

Multi elemental description

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Shares logical properties with the REVERSAL DESIGN (akin to A reversal design with very brief phases)

Each data point :
•PREDICTS FUTURE behavior in the same condition
•VERIFIES previous predictions
•COMPARISONS against the PREDICTIONS made by the data in the OTHER conditions

A

Multi element logic

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Rapid comparison of TREATMENT to BASELINE

Comparison of TWO or more treatments

Comparison of two or more ASSESSMENT conditions (e.g., functional analysis of behavior)

YOKED Elements - rapid alternation makes yoking more meaningful.
—Yoking: elements from one condition are linked to elements of a second condition

A

Multi element: Common Uses

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Elements from one condition are linked to elements of a second condition

A

Yoked

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Plus pre-treatment baseline, preferable unless clinically contra indicated

With no baseline
•Often includes a baseline or control as one of the alternating conditions
•If so, may differ from a pre-treatment baseline due to multiple treatment interference

With baseline plus a final treatment phase
• Clinically prudent in applied research.
•Permit detection of possible multiple treatment interference

A

Multielement: common variations

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

This Multi element variation is preferable unless clinically contra indicated

A

Multi element plus pre-treatment baseline

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

This multi element variation often includes a baseline or control as one of the alternating conditions. If so, may differ from a pre-treatment baseline due to multiple treatment interference.

Can include as one of its conditions, a “no treatment “ condition, Which is essentially a baseline condition that is not the initial distinct phase but rather is alternated randomly with all the other conditions under consideration.

A

Multi element with no baseline

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

This variation is clinically prudent in applied research. Permits detection of possible multiple treatment interference

A

Multi element with baseline plus a final treatment phase

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Each sub phase involves a different behavioral criterion i.e., a different value of the IV

A

Changing criterion: Procedure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Criterion in each subphase more closely resembles the terminal behavior goal

A

Changing criterion design

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Concluding that the independent variable has produced a change in the dependent variable but in fact the relation does not exist… False positive

A

Type l error

Analysis of single subject data

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Concluding that the independent variable has not produced a change in the dependent variable when in fact it has… False negative

A

Type ll error

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Doing a treatment analysis, a behavioral intervention is evaluated and found effective in decreasing problem behavior. A drug intervention was arm concurrently, independent of the behavioral intervention. The drug is later withdrawn , and problem behavior increases during the behavioral treatment analysis. The initial conclusion of the behavioral interventions effect may be considered…

A

A type l error

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Implement bi-directional changes to

A

Bolster demonstration of experimental control

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Treatments do not have to be withdrawn wrote it to reversal designs.

Does not require multiple behaviors, subjects, or settings, relative to multiple baseline

All subjects can receive treatment after the same length of baseline

A

Changing criterion advantages

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Subject to multiple treatment interference. Would the effects of anyone treatment be different if it wasn’t being simultaneously compared with another?

Can be examined/controlled by including a final best treatment phase.m

Unsuitable for individuals that have problems forming discriminations. Differences between conditions will appear as a function of how easily the conditions can be discriminated. I.e., how dissimilar They are

Like reversal limited to behavior that is reversible at least pliable
Less suitable for interventions that produce change slowly or require continuous implementation e.g., weight control intervention
May require considerable care in doing the necessary COUNTERBALANCING

A

Multielement limitations

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Less of a problem if the independent variables are themselves quite different.

Providing and anchoring additional stimuli e.g., therapist, ambient stimuli, to facilitate discrimination
Reducing the number of conditions
Instructional control been appropriate
Reverting to other designs

A

Multi element enhance discriminability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Inclusion of elements from two or more designs within the SAME experiment.
•Enhances the certainty of experimental control if it meets the requirements of multiple designs, especially if the conclusions of the planned design are tenuous, e.g., discriminability problems in multi element, add reversal.
•Can’ answer multiple questions, e.g., is A better than BL and is B better than A?

Often not planned, but used to enhance conclusions as the data evolve. Let data be your guide

A

Design combinations

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Systematically withdrawing treatment components to see if behavior change is maintained

Used To evaluate maintenance of treatment effects in the absence of the intervention

Used as a Fading process

A

Component analysis/sequential withdrawal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

The systematic examination of the effects of a range of values of the IV. Not just absences versus presence of the IV

Examples, the effects of differing values of a reinforcement schedule, e.g., FR1 verses of FR 10
Comparison of treatments at different strengths, e.g., brief time out versus long time out

A

Parametric analysis: description

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q 
Determining  effective paramedic values of contingencies, such as
      Reinforcer Duration or magnitude, 
       reinforcer delay,  
       reinforcer quality, 
        response effort or schedule.

As such, useful for
ease of implementation questions,
treatment degradation questions

A

Parametric analysis use

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

Assessment of behavior on occasions when the contingencies arranged in the analysis are not in effect

Uses, evaluate whether treatment effects are evident before treatment occurs.

Is further training really needed?

Examples, transfer of training, multiple probe technique

A

Use of probes: description

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

Events not related to the independent variable that may affect the dependent variable.

Potential to alter the results if not controlled

A

Extraneous variables

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

An uncontrolled factor known or suspected to exert influence on the DV

Likely to have altered the results

Examples

Carryover
Sequence effect
Multiple treatment Interference

A

Confound

38
Q

Confounds introduced by uncontrolled variables related to aspects of the environmental design.

Most common instances, (often unrelated)
Multiple treatment interference,
sequence events
, carryover events

A

Confounding design interactions

39
Q

If subjects are exposed to multiple treatments….

  • Conclusions about the outcome of each may be restricted to that specific context
  • Treatments may have produced a different effect in isolation
A

Multiple treatment interference-CONFOUND

40
Q

The effects on a person‘s behavior in One condition can be influenced by the subjects experience in a prior condition.

Do you get the same effect in the C phase of an ABCBC design if instead it has been an ACBCB design?

A

Sequence effects

CONFOUND

41
Q

PATTERNS of behavior established in one session…
• May inadvertently extend into a second session.
• Even if the independent variables are very different….

 •Calling into question the observations in the subsequent session, (INFLUENCES of the INDEPENDENT VARIABLE or influence of the IV in the prior session?)
A

Carry over effects

CONFOUND

42
Q

Manipulate only one IV at a time
Counterbalance the design :

 E.g., if subject A starts with treatment A First, let subject B start with treatment B first.

• ALTERNATE  order of conditions Within subjects

ENHANCE DISCRIMINABILITY

When multiple treatments COMPARED, end it with a final evaluation in ISOLATION

A

Minimize Confounding Variables

43
Q

All data analysis methods strive to minimize these Errors but vary with respect to the emphasis on each.

Visual inspection – minimize type one error, perhaps at the Expense of making more type ll error’s

Test of statistical significance – minimize type to error’s, perhaps at the expense of making more type one error’s

A

Minimizing type one and two errors

44
Q

In behavior analysis, we seek robust variables that produce large effects: the criteria for concluding an effect using visual inspection are very stringent

To the point we are visual inspection may disregard actual differences or changes when they are real but small

Small often equals not clinically significant

A

Type l error and robust effects

45
Q

More likely to identify independent variables that produce robust Effects

Social significance is of primary importance: statistical versus clinical significance

Encourage the examination of variability rather than just overall effects

A

Advantages of visual inspection

46
Q

Factors involved in making data decisions based on visual analysis of single subject data

A

Analysis of single subject data

Mean/level,
trend,
latency to change,
other factors

47
Q

Changes in the average level of performance within a phase or condition.

The greater this shift relative to the Comparison condition, the more convincing the effects

A

Visual data analysis: MEAN SHIFT

48
Q

changes in the tendency for the data to increase or decrease over time:

Does the data in the preceding phase predict something different than what occurred in the test phase?

Was the trend in the preceding phase consistent with the conclusion made about the test phase?

A

Visual data analysis: TREND

49
Q

Latency to change – how quickly does the behavior change once the independent variable is manipulated?

Shorter equals more convincing the effect.

Long to change produce suspicion

A

Visual data analysis: LATENCY

50
Q

Variability and overlap: e.g., how much do the data points during intervention overlap with the data points in baseline?

Phase duration: e.g., was the change in intervention demonstrated long enough to convincingly show it was different from baseline

Consistency of the effect in replication: e.g., does the level revert to similar levels if you return to the intervention phase a second time

A

Visual data analysis: other factors

51
Q

Do we really need it? Counter argument: independent variable in accuracy would be immediately detectable through changes in the dependent variable. But changes may not occur even if Independent variable is implemented in accurately

Extraneous variables my account for a steady state

A

Procedural integrity measures: necessary?

52
Q

Often measured in the same way as
The dependent variables, measurement of procedural reliability.

Measures the extent to which the application of the IV over the course of an analysis matches the plan description.,
E.g., the reinforcer was delivered within five seconds on 98% of the occasions for which it was scheduled.

Provides the experimenter with data regarding whether calibration of the treatment agent is needed

A

Procedural integrity measurement

53
Q

Placing a high priority on independent variable simplification. Elimination complexity and ambiguity

Provide adequate training and practice for those implementing treatment. Curtail procedural drift

Direct contingencies on treatment Fidelity. Not just measurement, but intervention to promote procedural integrity

A

Reducing procedural integrity threats

54
Q

Other considerations. Be a critical consumer of research, approach methods, conclusions skeptically

Be a consumer of broth sorts of research. Your interpretation may differ from those in other disciplines… But good data is good data, reliable effects are we liable effects.

It May help to consider what sorts of things get manuscripts rejected

A

Being a research consumer

55
Q

Description: examination of the acceptability or viability of a program intervention

IE, are the changes in behavior of clinical or applied importance

A

Social validity assessment

56
Q

Social significance of goals or target behavior.
Represents deficit in functioning as society views it.
E.g., lack of appropriate social skills.

Will increase or decrease in the measured dimension of the behavior result in improvement in a persons life

A

Social validity: of goals and targets

57
Q

Appropriateness of the procedures: one that produces minimal adverse affects e.g., a drug reduce his aggressive behavior without producing gross sedation

One and that can be practically administered: complexity, practicality, cost

Regardless of possible effects, Unacceptable treatment variables will not be used

A

Social validity: of procedures

58
Q

Social importance of the results
:
Enhances subjects functioning in their environment
E.g., disabled person becomes competent in the use of public transportation.

Ultimately, is the person better off now that the behavior has changed. Well it was old and increased opportunity for reinforcement

A

Social Validity: of results

59
Q

Methods:

• client, those important in their life, experts, ….EVALUATE whether distinct improvements have been achieved
AND
•is the change is worth the cost and effort

-• use of rating scales

A

Social Validity: subjective evaluation

60
Q

My expectations for a satisfactory outcome of the training program is,

• 1 =very pessimistic, 7 equals very optimistic

I feel the approach to infant care by using this type of training program is…

   • 1 equals very appropriate: 7 equals very appropriate

At this point, I think my husband’s ability to handle care taking concern is, 1 equals considerably worse 7 equals greater improved

( Rating Scales)

A

Social validity: sample questions

61
Q

Consumer evaluation may be inconsistent with actual changes in behavior

High levels of satisfaction do not necessarily indicate there has been an important change

Who actually constitutes the consumer?

A

Subjective evaluation considerations

62
Q

Is the behavior after treatment comparable to unaffected or normal peers
• Identify RELEVANT peers based on important characteristics e.g., age gender, SES, but different with respect to the target behavior
•Identify whether the individual was brought to within comparable parameters regarding the relevant behavior

A

Social validity: social comparison

63
Q

Gajar 1984 -conversation skills in youth with head trauma
•Confabulatory and perseverative responding
Inability to stay on topic
Excessive self disclosure, interruptions
Inappropriate laughter

Peer group
Groups of 20 to 22-year-old college students.
Provided a topic for conversation
. Rate of positive conversation or behaviors.

A

Social comparison

64
Q

does the level revert to similar levels if you return to the intervention phase a second time

A

Consistency of the effect in replication: Visual data analysis

65
Q

how much do the data points during intervention overlap with the data points in baseline?

A

Variability and overlap: Visual analysis

66
Q

was the change in intervention demonstrated long enough to convincingly show it was different from baseline

A

Phase duration: Visual analysis

67
Q

Useful for highly variable behavior that fluctuates as a function of non-experimental variables

A

Multielement Advantages

68
Q

Can absorb the influence of extraneous variables as long as clear and consistent differences remain between conditions.

Can be more efficient, in terms of the number of sessions, then longer designs

A

Muti- element advantages

69
Q

Used To evaluate maintenance of treatment effects in the absence of the intervention
Used as a Fading process

A

Component analysis/sequential withdrawal

70
Q

Most common instances, (often unrelated)
Multiple treatment interference,
sequence events
, carryover events

A

Confounds introduced by uncontrolled variables related to aspects of the environmental design

71
Q

Each data point predicts future behavior in the same condition

Each data point serves to verify previous predictions

Each data point permits comparison against the predictions made by data in the other conditions

A

Multielement logic

72
Q

Experimental control is demonstrated when behavior is appreciably and consistently different in one condition relative to others

A

Multielement logic

73
Q

Remember on graph if you see larger changes in the criteria that means there was greater variability in the previous trial. If there are smaller changes then there is less variably or it is more stable

A

Changing criterion graph

74
Q

Lower the criteria at some point during the trials in order to demonstrate experimental control

A

Bi- directional criteria graph

75
Q

an experimental design consisting of an initial baseline phase, an intervention phase, and a return to baseline conditions by withdrawing the independent variable to see whether responding “reverses” to levels observed in the initial baseline phase.

A

ABA Reversal Design

76
Q

An experimental design in which first one element of the treatment is withdrawn, then a second, and so on, until all elements have been withdrawn; particularly well suited to assessing behavior for maintenance.

A

Sequential Withdrawal design

77
Q

A systematic assessment of 2 or more independent variables or components that comprise a treatment package. Component analyses are important for the analysis of behavior; however, previous research provides only cursory descriptions of the topic.

A

Component analysis

78
Q

; J. O. Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2007). Researchers and clinicians conduct component analyses to identify the active components of treatment packages that are responsible for behavior change. For behavioral treatments to be analytic, researchers must identify specific components of a treatment package that produce behavior change (Baer et al.). Component analyses also may enhance the efficiency and social validity (Wolf, 1978) of behavioral treatments by eliminating ineffective and perhaps effortful components and by evaluating the necessity of more restrictive components (e.g., punishment procedures) or those components of the intervention that are unnecessary. This in turn may lead to better generalization and maintenance of the program if parents, teachers, or staff have to be trained on only the key elements of the intervention. Finally, conducting a component analysis is a skill required of Board Certified Behavior Analysts

A

Component analysis

79
Q

Used to demonstrate experimental control during fading and shaping procedures.

A

Changing criterion uses

80
Q

Strict alternation

A

Research answe

81
Q

The utility of this design relies on stimulus DISCRIMINATION
•. MIXED vs MULTIPLE schedules.
•. Best it each condition associated with a distinct set of stimuli to promote discriminability

A

Multi element: discriminability

82
Q

Conditions are counterbalanced ACROSS experimental CONTEXTS such as time of day, therapist, to neutralize confounding factors.
• Example, if treatment A always run in the morning and treatment B in the afternoon, and differences emerge… you don’t know if the effects are attributed to the treatments or to the time of day
• Counterbalance by someone running A in the morning and at other times, running A in the afternoon.

A

Multi element: counterbalancing

83
Q

Strict alternation not recommend , as it does not neutralize sequence effects

Randomization
• NOT ABABABAB
• Rather ABBABAAABBABB

Randomization with restriction
• E.g. no more than two of the same condition in a row

A

Multi element: order of conditions

84
Q

Compare treatments while minimizing sequence effects of differential results stemming from the order of implementation of independent variables. Can occur in reversal designs because each independent variable must be in effect for a long period of time.

Minimizes these effects through random alternation.. sometimes A follows B, sometimes B follows A.sometimes B follows B. And short periods in which each IV is in effect

Useful for highly variable behavior that fluctuates as a function of non-experimental variables
Can’t absorb the influence of extraneous variables as long as clear and consistent differences remain between conditions.

Can be more efficient, in terms of the number of sessions, then longer designs

A

Multi element advantages

85
Q

an experiment designed to discover the differential effects of a range of values of an independent variable.

A

Parametric

86
Q

Experimental control is demonstrated when behavior is APPRECIABLY and consistently DIFFERENT In one condition RELATIVE to others.

A

Multielement- logic

87
Q

Plus pre-treatment baseline, preferable unless clinically contra indicated

A

Multi elements – common Variations

88
Q

The extent to which the independent variables are implemented as dictated by the research or treatment plan.

Can be a major source of confounding variables
Inconsistencies among therapist can influence data

Procedural drift over time may change behavior in the absence of a planned change in the independent variable
A

Procedural integrity assessment

89
Q

We already knew that.
Is this finding actually novel?
Does it contribute significantly beyond what we already knew

Understanding, prediction, and control
Contributes to the applied realm

Is this about behavior? Or is this about a hypothetical construct?

You can’t convince me these results aren’t caused by something else. Extraneous variables and confidence. The design did not permit a reasonable demonstration of experimental control

I don’t think your dad I sufficiently convincing to support those conditions.
Effects insufficiently robust

Poorly describe a methodology

Is this meaningful or useful outside of the tightly controlled confines of the laboratory

A

Consuming research

90
Q

Other considerations:
Be a critical consumer research; approach methods, conclusions skeptically

Be a consumer of broad sorts of research
Your interpretation may differ from those in other disciplines… But good dad is good data:

I may help to consider what sorts of things get manuscripts rejected…

A

Being a research consumer

91
Q

Under some circumstances, the most direct test of social validity can be accomplished by permitting the person to select directly from treatment options

* assuming all interventions are equally effective
* Can we use even if limited expressive language
A

Social validity consumer choice

92
Q

Alternate order of conditions within subjects

Example, If subject A starts with treatment A first, let subject B start with treatment B first.

A

Example of counterbalance the design, to minimize con found

BEHP 5012 Units 1-9 Mine (23 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions