Parametric evaluation of procedural fidelity level with combined errors during differential reinforcement of other behavior

IF 3.4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Paige O'Neill, Catalina N. Rey, Thomas Eilers, Andrew R. Craig
{"title":"Parametric evaluation of procedural fidelity level with combined errors during differential reinforcement of other behavior","authors":"Paige O'Neill,&nbsp;Catalina N. Rey,&nbsp;Thomas Eilers,&nbsp;Andrew R. Craig","doi":"10.1002/jaba.70077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) is an intervention used to address challenging behavior; however, its effectiveness may be diminished by procedural fidelity errors. Previous research has shown that DRO effects may be robust despite marginal errors of commission and omission, but the effects of combined errors (i.e., both commission and omission errors) on the efficacy of DRO have not been investigated. The purpose of this study was to parametrically evaluate procedural fidelity level (i.e., 100, 80, 60, 40, and 20% fidelity) in DRO when implemented with combined errors in a human-operant arrangement using a reversal design. Results indicated that the DRO was efficacious for most participants when implemented with 100, 80, or 60% fidelity and inefficacious for most participants when implemented with 40% or 20% fidelity when implemented with combined errors.</p>","PeriodicalId":14983,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied behavior analysis","volume":"59 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jaba.70077","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.70077","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

Differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) is an intervention used to address challenging behavior; however, its effectiveness may be diminished by procedural fidelity errors. Previous research has shown that DRO effects may be robust despite marginal errors of commission and omission, but the effects of combined errors (i.e., both commission and omission errors) on the efficacy of DRO have not been investigated. The purpose of this study was to parametrically evaluate procedural fidelity level (i.e., 100, 80, 60, 40, and 20% fidelity) in DRO when implemented with combined errors in a human-operant arrangement using a reversal design. Results indicated that the DRO was efficacious for most participants when implemented with 100, 80, or 60% fidelity and inefficacious for most participants when implemented with 40% or 20% fidelity when implemented with combined errors.

其他行为差异强化过程中组合误差的程序保真度参数评价
其他行为差异强化(DRO)是一种用于解决挑战性行为的干预措施;然而,其有效性可能因程序保真度误差而降低。先前的研究表明,尽管存在委托和遗漏的边际误差,但DRO的效果可能是稳健的,但尚未研究组合误差(即委托和遗漏错误)对DRO效果的影响。本研究的目的是参数化地评估在人为操作安排中使用反转设计的联合误差时DRO的程序保真度水平(即100、80、60、40和20%保真度)。结果表明,当保真度为100,80或60%时,DRO对大多数参与者有效,而当保真度为40%或20%时,对大多数参与者无效。
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
Journal of applied behavior analysis PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
20.70%
发文量
61
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书