Test 1 RM Flashcards
Using simultaneous presentation to increase veg consumption in a mildly selective child with autism
- most Bx is focused on consequence manipulation not antecedent management
- 1 participant multiple baselines across food with reversal
- pref assessment with 8 condiments (15 bites) picked 3
- DV: % of bites consumed. Defined by eating accepting within 10 seconds of ‘take a bite’
- Session 15 bites, never refused. No consequences if they did refuse
- IOR. 40% of trails take.
- IV: procedure, condiment not covering the whole food item
- Baseline 0 its, treatment 100%, baseline 0
- Simultaneous presentation was effective. Study did not fine flavour-flavor conditioning since baseline went back to 0%
- future look at pickier eaters
IR multiple baselines across food items with reversal. Simultaneous pairings.
Why is the individual so important
- Bring research and practice closer together
- to isolate mechanisms of change
- therefore contributing to new procedures
What is extrapolation of parts
brain functions were mapped out by slowly destroying different areas fo the brain. Following Brocca’s study.
jnd
just noticeable difference of sensory thresholds
contribution of repeated measures
- single case design
- recognizing the individuality
- applied problems
normal law of error
normal distribution
Variability with the subject
fetcher noticed variability from trial to trial with sensory differences, these appeared to be normally distributed. However this raised question to error in group designs.
introspection
observe ones own thoughts
retention curve
shows forgetting over time
basis of inferential statistics
generality
applicability
based on averages
make estimations based on certain characteristics
What is the case study method
record persons development over time
Disadvantages to reporting percentages of success
When scores are lumped together they become meaningless. some people will make gains and others will not.
IV
the procedure
DV
how/what you measure
major limitations to statistical averaging
- loose individuals outliers and scores
- cannot apply to heterogeneous groups
Problem to applying global treatments to heterogeneous groups
-cant tell what characteristics are associated with success so they don’t know if people will get better or worse
ethical limitations
not okay to withhold treatment from one group (control)
practice problems to group comparisons
- ethics
- cant find homogeneous groups
- averaging results
- generality
- intersubject validity
what is the problem with averaging results
will not represet performance of anyone in the group
homogeneous groups
are the same (but really cant be because of individual differences).
grouped by academic performance vs. all grade level in the same class (heterogeneous)
within subject variability
ind differences within a subject from trial to trail. Sensory test example.