Comparing interteaching and discussion forums in an asynchronous online classroom: A replication

IF 3 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Journal of applied behavior analysis Pub Date : 2026-03-30 DOI:10.1002/jaba.70060

Sacha K. G. Shaw, Jennifer L. Posey, Thomas Zane, Robert F. Putnam, Alice Shillingsburg, Mary Jane Weiss

{"title":"Comparing interteaching and discussion forums in an asynchronous online classroom: A replication","authors":"Sacha K. G. Shaw, Jennifer L. Posey, Thomas Zane, Robert F. Putnam, Alice Shillingsburg, Mary Jane Weiss","doi":"10.1002/jaba.70060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study replicated Shaw et al. (2024) by comparing quiz and assignment scores in interteaching and discussion forum conditions using an alternating-treatments design. Five graduate students in an asynchronous course participated. Variations from Shaw et al. included (a) the inclusion or revision of interteaching components, (b) alternative measures of generality, and (c) social validity data. Participants scored higher on quizzes in the interteaching condition (M = 93%) than in the discussion forum condition (M = 72%). Mean quiz scores were analyzed using a paired-sample t test, which indicated statistically significant differences between the two conditions, t(24) = 5.80, p < .0001 (two-tailed), with a substantial effect size of partial η2 = 0.58. Interteaching did not have a significant effect on project scores. Most participants (80%) favored interteaching. The discussion identifies multiple treatment interference as a potential limitation and explores the implications of the results for graduate coursework in applied behavior analysis.","PeriodicalId":14983,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied behavior analysis","volume":"59 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of applied behavior analysis","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jaba.70060","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study replicated Shaw et al. (2024) by comparing quiz and assignment scores in interteaching and discussion forum conditions using an alternating-treatments design. Five graduate students in an asynchronous course participated. Variations from Shaw et al. included (a) the inclusion or revision of interteaching components, (b) alternative measures of generality, and (c) social validity data. Participants scored higher on quizzes in the interteaching condition (M = 93%) than in the discussion forum condition (M = 72%). Mean quiz scores were analyzed using a paired-sample t test, which indicated statistically significant differences between the two conditions, t(24) = 5.80, p < .0001 (two-tailed), with a substantial effect size of partial η² = 0.58. Interteaching did not have a significant effect on project scores. Most participants (80%) favored interteaching. The discussion identifies multiple treatment interference as a potential limitation and explores the implications of the results for graduate coursework in applied behavior analysis.

查看原文本刊更多论文

异步在线课堂中互动式教学与讨论论坛的比较：复制。

本研究采用交替处理设计，通过比较互动式教学和讨论论坛条件下的测验和作业分数，复制了Shaw等人（2024）的研究结果。五名研究生参加了异步课程。Shaw等人的变化包括(a)纳入或修订相互教学成分，(b)一般性的替代测量方法，以及(c)社会效度数据。参与者在互动教学条件下的测验得分（M = 93%）高于讨论论坛条件下的得分（M = 72%）。测验均分采用配对样本t检验，两组间差异有统计学意义，t(24) = 5.80, p(2) = 0.58。互动教学对专题评分无显著影响。大多数参与者（80%）赞成互动式教学。讨论确定了多重治疗干扰是一个潜在的限制，并探讨了结果对应用行为分析研究生课程的影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of applied behavior analysis PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-

CiteScore

5.80

自引率

20.70%

发文量