Abstract
Behavioral practitioners and researchers often define skill acquisition in terms of meeting specific mastery criteria. Only 2 studies have systematically evaluated the impact of any dimension of mastery criteria on skill maintenance. Recent survey data indicate practitioners often adopt lower criterion levels than are found to reliably produce maintenance. Data regarding the mastery criteria adopted by applied researchers are not currently available. This study provides a descriptive comparison of mastery criteria reported in behavior-analytic research with that utilized by practitioners. Results indicate researchers are more likely to adopt higher levels of accuracy across fewer observations, whereas practitioners are more likely to adopt lower levels of accuracy across more observations. Surprisingly, a large amount of research (a) lacks technological descriptions of the mastery criterion adopted and (b) does not include assessments of maintenance following acquisition. We discuss implications for interpretations within and across research studies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., & Risley, T. R. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 91–97. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1968.1-91.
Fuller, J. L., & Fienup, D. M. (2018). A preliminary analysis of mastery criterion levels: Effects on response maintenance. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 11, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-017-0201-0.
Johnston, J. M., & O’Neill, G. (1973). The analysis of performance criteria defining course grades as a determinant of college student academic performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6, 261–268. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1973.6-261.
Love, J. R., Carr, J. E., Almason, S. M., & Petursdottir, A. I. (2009). Early and intensive behavioral intervention for autism: A survey of clinical practices. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 3, 421–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2008.08.008.
Luiselli, J. K., Russo, D. C., Christian, W. P., & Wilczynski, S. P. (2008). Skill acquisition, direct instruction, and educational curricula. In J. K. Luiselli (Ed.), Effective practices for children with autism (p. 196). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Richling, S. M., Rapp, J. T., Funk, J. A., & Moreno, V. (2014). Low publication rate of 2005 conference presentations: Implications for practitioners serving individuals with autism and intellectual disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 35, 2744–2750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.07.023.
Richling, S. M., Williams, W. L., & Carr, J. E. (in press). The effects of different mastery criteria on the skill maintenance of children with developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.
Sayrs, D. M., & Ghezzi, P. M. (1997). The steady-state strategy in applied behavior analysis. The Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin, 15(2), 29–30.
Semb, G. (1974). The effects of mastery criteria and assignment length on college-student test performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7, 61–69. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1974.7-61.
Stokes, T. F., & Baer, D. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 349–367. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaa.1977.10-349.
Author Note
This study was conducted by the first author, under the supervision of the second author, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the master’s degree at Auburn University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
Cassidy McDougale declares that she has no conflict of interest. Sarah Richling declares that she has no conflict of interest. Emily Longino declares that she has no conflict of interest. Soracha O’Rourke declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Research Highlights
• Components of the teaching arrangement (e.g., the specific mastery criterion) are independent variables that impact learning outcomes such as skill maintenance and generalization.
• Applied researchers more commonly use higher percentages correct across fewer sessions to determine mastery, whereas clinicians use lower percentages correct across additional sessions.
• A large portion of the reviewed research lacks technological descriptions of the mastery criteria used and assessment of maintenance following acquisition.
• Further research is needed to determine what components of mastery criteria are important for promoting maintenance.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McDougale, C.B., Richling, S.M., Longino, E.B. et al. Mastery Criteria and Maintenance: a Descriptive Analysis of Applied Research Procedures. Behav Analysis Practice 13, 402–410 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-019-00365-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-019-00365-2