Test 6 Flashcards
What is an ABABAB design
repeated demonstration of control of the treatment variable and extended version of the study .
What is a prime condition e.g. C
Non contingent reinforcement
What is a ceiling effect?
the level at which an independent variable no longer has an effect on a dependent variable, or the level above which variance in an independent variable is no longer measured or estimated
What is counterbalancing
a method for controlling order effects in a repeated measures design
What is multiple treatment interference
- only want to manipulate one variable at a time otherwise we don’t know what is creating behaviour change
- or treatment in earlier phases may effect treatment in later phases
what are carry over effects?
A carryover effect is an effect that “carries over” from one experimental condition to another
What is a placebo?
a condition that has no therapeutic effect
What does a placebo phase control for?
the subjects expected effects of the drug.
what are residual effects
left over effects from the drug
What is single blind?
- only researcher knows
- maintains flexibility
What is double blind
- gold standard
- randomly assigned two groups, one gets drug the other gets placebo
What are interaction effects?
is the simultaneous effect of two or more independent variables on at least one dependent variable in which their joint effect is significantly greater (or significantly less) than the sum of the parts.
What is a composite treatment package
Whole package is introduced at once, not each individual component.
what is meant by masking?
refers to whether patients, clinicians providing an intervention, people assessing outcomes, and/or data analysts were aware or unaware of the group to which patients were assigned.
-the effects are hidden by the other variable/treatments implemented.
What is a changing criterion design?
brief BL
R+ introduce, then criterion for that R+ is changed over the corse of the evaluation.
Design in which an initial baseline phase is followed by a series of treatment phases consisting of successive and gradually changing criteria.
When do you use a changing criterion design
Best suited for evaluating effects of instructional techniques on stepwise changes in rate, frequency, accuracy, duration, or latency of single target behavior
Is a good design for school settings
Final point. You can reach a level where you cannot go any higher or any faster due to subject limitations
What is a range bound changing criterion design
-addresses concerns about behavioural variability
-Allows for greater flexibility in performance.
Fosters consistency as well as improved performance.
You can report proportion of days performance fell within range.
E purpose
use DRA/token economy with escape R+
E method
4 yr old
only consumed substance via bottle prior to study
-session in room with Rifton chair, observation window, and table. Used Nuk timer, and token board
- Frequency data taken
E DV
- Acceptance (entire bite in mouth within 5s or presentation, and swallowed within 30s, demonstrated by open mouth)
- Food refusal-head turns 45D past the midline during bite presentation.-Disruptions (any part of body comes into contact during bite presentation. -Mouth covers (placing bib or one or both hands within 2in of the mouth during bite presentation.
E IOA
-second observer took reliability data during 43% of meals
-IOA agreements by total and times 100
99 and 96 acceptance and food refusal.
E Differential positive reinforcement of alternative behaviour
-2 BL. Both prompted to take a bite with food presented at her mouth 2-3in from lips. Accepted in 5s equalled praise
-praise plus escape (15s) contingent on food refusal, represented after 30s or end of escape interval.
-praise plus escape extinction
food kept in from of lips until new presentation or acceptance.
-session done after 10 bites or 20m
-variety if foods
E DPRA plus physical guidance
-two conditions contingent of refusal contingent on non acceptance -within 5s why guidance was pressure on jaw to deposit bite in mouth -other steps same as BL -failled
E Differential negative reinforcement of alternative behaviour
same as before accept she received a token when accepting a bite.
- 30min or after all tokens received
- tokens increased over sessions
- best
E results
did not accept food during DPRA/or plus PG
- introduced Nuk
- refusal high during DPRA low during DNRA
E limitations
more time consuming, should start with other.
OC subject/setting
10yr old, profound ID
no sucking/finger feeding/lip closure
sessions at school 10-30min
tongue thrusts most common during lunch
OC response definitions
tongue out
food expulsion
chewing
pushback
OC observation/reliability
11 trained staff
trained via write material and practice prior to
-observations began when trained up to 80 IOA
-used partial interval observation system
-10s intervals and 7.5s observation periods (2.5 to record)
-also measured grams of food expelled via weight
OC IOA
1/3 of sessions in experimental condition
53% of total sessions/and weight
-agreements over total
-agreement of weight 95%
OC procedures/BL
pre experimental conditions- received message therapy to tongue and mouth area 2 yrs prior to the study -
-no changes made to rpefeeding program
-Differential reinforcement procedure was already implemented, but terminated during BL
BL: sitting in chair, catch tray placed under his chin. prior to meal all food was ground to puree
food presented without regard to tongue position. Each spoonful was 5g, terminated session when all 300g had been fed. 9-20m
OC treatment
set up same as BL
- food only presented when tongue in mouth
- tongue moved back if outside of lower lip
OC maintenance
data collected once each week following termination
treatment remained in effect
only difference were staff delivering treatment
OC design
ABAB reversal
OC social validation
repeated BL measures with 9 other individuals and video taped. Shown to OT/PT and asked to give their clinical oppinion
OC results
decreased expulsion
increased chewing
decreased pushback
T Purpose
The purpose of the current study was to demonstrate the efficacy of texture fading with periodic probes at higher textures, com- bined with reinforcement and extinction procedures, in establishing higher texture food consumption by children who display food selectivity.
T participants
4 kids all sever food selectivity All food problems and limited types/forms OT evaluated each child all session in a room with a high chair window with mirror for observers
T DV
- treatment three meals per day, fed by Tx at home or clinic
- Acceptance, opening mouth so food could be delivered within 5s
- Swallow, clearing mouth of all food or liquid within 30s
- Expulsion-emitting nay behaviour reusing food bigger than a pea out of the house/lips
- Gag , making retching or hoking sounds before presentation
T DV measure
percentage of occurrence out of total and times by 100
-pre and post food weights recorded
T IOA
2nd observer recorded data on target behaviours -taken 22-39% of meals -mean IOA: A 99.6 S 98.3 G 98.9 E 97.7
T R+ assessment
presented with single stimulus and reaction recorded
during reinforcement assessment top 3-5 preferred items were tested for reinforcer efficacy
T treatment
- same treatment components in effect for all meals (beg texture, texture fading, and probe meals).
- Praise contingent of accepting bites, 15s of toy play contingent on swallowing, escape extinction for IR, extinction for expelled bites
T texture fading
treatment in effect for all meals.
-All meals lasted 30m or until age appropriate portion consumed
-texture started with what OT recommended
-probes were done to determine to next texture for fading.
-pureed, junior, ground, chopped
criterion at 80%, expulsion/gags below 20%
-if probe IR then textures combined
-if probe CR then next meal at that level until MC met
T experimental design
multiple baseline across subjects design with probes.
T results
was effective in estab- lishing consumption of higher texture food for 4 children with food selectivity.
- differences among children on how fast fading occurred
- grams consumed increased/decreased or stayed the same for some students
T s/l
- experimental design did not permit a com- plete systematic evaluation of the necessity of texture fading
- extinction for one participant not added until the 10th meal
- one clinical error in texture progression
BSM purpose
The intent was to extend the behavioral management research by demonstrating that behavioral management pro- cedures can be effective throughout an agency’s staff population over an extended time period
BSM Setting
School
- 1:5 staff to kid ratio
- 3 schools
- all ID
BSM DV
- on task student working ind on an assigned task (functional and non functional/materials and activities)
- to be functional they had to meet criteria for the five skill domains (leisure, vocational, social, community, self help)
- not included self care, transitions, interactions with volunteers
BSM observation
monitored bx for 10s CR if they met both criterion
-repeated for 3 intervals
BSM reliability
23% of observations
agreements over disagreements time 100
on task 93
BSM procedure
BL: educators ran usual classroom (including IEP) Teacher in service and supervision: service and supervision program implemented for the 4 schools. (change to functional curriculum with definitions an rational, examples, used participative a management approach-staff make ideas) 2nd meeting - staff presented and feedback given. then implemented -next principal visited class around 1 time per week, asked Q and prompted interactions, feedback given. Feedback alter faded.
BSM experimental design
AB with systematic replications
BSM results
-functional tasks increased in all classrooms
-results maintained during follow up
-using functional materials increased 62 on average
-
BSM on task link
Did not find a relationship between increasing functional tasks and a decrease in on task behaviour.
BSM acceptability
all staff liked, focus don functional tasks
