Evaluation of Computer-Based Training to Teach Adults Visual Analysis Skills of Baseline-Treatment Graphs

  • Alexandra C. O’Grady
  • Sharon A. Reeve
  • Kenneth F. Reeve
  • Jason C. Vladescu
  • Candice M. (Jostad) Lake
Special Section: Education of Behavior Analysts
  • 6 Downloads

Abstract

The primary method of data analysis in applied behavior analysis is visual analysis. However, few investigations to date have taught the skills necessary for accurate visual analysis. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate computer-based training on the visual analysis skills of adults with no prior experience. Visual analysis was taught with interactive computer-based training that included written instructions and opportunities for practice with textual feedback. Generalization of participant skills from simulated to handwritten and authentic data graphs was programmed for and assessed during the study. A multiple-baseline design was used across visual analysis properties (i.e., variability, level, and trend), with continuous overall intervention effect generalization probes, replicated across 4 participants to evaluate computer-based training for accurate visual analysis of A-B graphs. The results showed that all participants accurately visually analyzed A-B graphs following the computer-based training for variability, level, trend, and overall intervention effect. These visual analysis skills generalized to handwritten and authentic data graphs and maintained approximately 1 day, 1 week, 2 weeks, and 1 month following mastery of each property for all participants. Implications of the results suggest that computer-based training improved accurate visual analysis skills for adults with no prior experience.

Keywords

Baseline-treatment graphs Computer-based training Visual analysis 

Notes

Funding

No funding was used for this research.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflicts of Interest

All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Baer, D. M. (1977). Perhaps it would be better not to know everything. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 167–172.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River: pearson Education.Google Scholar
  3. Fienup, D. M., & Critchfield, T. S. (2010). Efficiently establishing concepts of inferential statistics and hypothesis decision making through contextually controlled equivalence classes. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 437–462.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Fisher, W. W., Kelley, M. E., & Lomas, J. E. (2003). Visual aids and structured criteria for improving visual inspection and interpretation of single-case designs. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 387–406.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Jostad, C. M. (2011). Evaluating the effects of a job-aid for teaching visual inspection skills to university students. Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI: Unpublished doctoral dissertation.Google Scholar
  6. Lee, K. (2017). Rethinking the accessibility of online higher education: a historical review. The Internet and Higher Education, 33, 15–23.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.01.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Nosik, M. R., & Williams, W. L. (2011). Component evaluation of a computer based format for teaching discrete trial and backward chaining. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32, 1694–1702.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2011.02.022.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Parsonson, B. S. (1999). Fine grained analysis of visual data. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 18, 47–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Parsonson, B. S., & Baer, D. M. (1992). The visual analysis of data. In T. Kratochwill & J. Levin (Eds.), Single-case research design and analysis: new directions for psychology and education (pp. 15–40). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  10. Pluchino, S. V. (1998). The effects of multiple-exemplar training and stimulus variability on generalization to line graphs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, the City University of New York, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  11. Ray, J. M., & Ray, R. D. (2008). Train-to-code: an adaptive expert system for training systematic observation and coding skills. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 673–693.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.673.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Reimers, T., & Wacker, D. (1988). Parents’ ratings of the acceptability of behavioral treatment recommendations made in an outpatient clinic: a preliminary analysis of the influence of treatment effectiveness. Behavioral Disorders, 14, 7–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Sarokoff, R. A., & Sturmey, P. (2004). The effects of behavioral skills training on staff implementation of discrete-trials teaching. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37, 535–538.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Saunders, R. R., & Green, G. (1999). A discrimination analysis of training-structure effects on stimulus equivalence outcomes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 72, 117–137.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1999.72-117.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Schnell, L. K., Sidener, T. M., DeBar, R. M., Vladescu, J. C., & Kahng, S. W. (2014). The effects of a computer-based training tutorial on making procedural modifications to standard functional analyses. Unpublished master’s thesis, Caldwell University, Caldwell.Google Scholar
  16. Skinner, B. F. (1958). Teaching machines. Science, 128, 969–977.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.128.3330.969.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Stewart, K. K., Carr, J. E., Brandt, C. W., & McHenry, M. M. (2007). An evaluation of the conservative dual-criterion method for teaching university students to visually inspect AB design graphs. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 713–718.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2007.713-718.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Wolfe, K., & Slocum, T. A. (2015). A comparison of two approaches to training visual analysis of AB graphs. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48, 472–477.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.212.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Wolfe, K., Seaman, M. A., & Drasgow, E. (2016). Interrater agreement on the visual analysis of individual tiers and functional relations in multiple baseline designs. Behavior Modification, 40, 852–873.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexandra C. O’Grady
    • 1
  • Sharon A. Reeve
    • 1
  • Kenneth F. Reeve
    • 1
  • Jason C. Vladescu
    • 1
  • Candice M. (Jostad) Lake
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Applied Behavior AnalysisCaldwell UniversityCaldwellUSA
  2. 2.Wedgwood’s Autism Center for Child DevelopmentGrand RapidsUSA

Personalised recommendations