Abstract
Applied behavior analysis professionals have valuable expertise to share with parents of individuals with disabilities. Unfortunately, professionals also tend to talk like professionals, which means they use technical terminology that may be detrimental to productive relationships with stakeholders. Several studies have documented that laypersons can react adversely when hearing technical terms (e.g., Critchfield et al. (2017), in Behav Anal Pract 10(2), 97–106; Rolider & Axelrod (2005), in Heward, Heron, Neef, Peterson, Sainato, Cartedge,…Dardig (Eds.), Focus on behavior analysis in education: Achievement, challenges, and opportunities (pp. 283–294), Pearson Education), suggesting that such terms could disrupt the dissemination of behavioral expertise from professional to stakeholder. The present study evaluated the effect of technical terms embedded into parent training. Seventeen parents of individuals with disabilities were taught to implement discrete trial teaching via individualized instructions containing high or low percentages of jargon. Jargon was individually determined for each participant based on a pre-evaluation. Parents who encountered more jargon benefitted significantly less from the training, and social validity data suggested that jargon damaged the professional-stakeholder relationship in several ways. These findings support the idea that technical terminology has a deleterious effect on the dissemination of evidence-based practices. We suggest some directions for future research to better explore such effects and to identify methods for diminishing the adverse impacts of jargon.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
If a participant did not respond to a knowledge of terms question within the pre-evaluation, then that term was not used within their instructions.
If the participant completed three trials, then they were scored out of 18 steps, all other participants were scored out of 17 steps.
Data had to be collected but did not have to be accurate to be scored as correct.
Throughout, treatment integrity is used to describe the experimenters’ implementation of the experimental procedures, whereas procedural fidelity is used to describe parents’ implementation of DTT.
References
Al-Nasser, T., Williams, W. L., & Feeney, B. (2019). A brief evaluation of a pictorially enhanced self-instruction packet on participant fidelity across multiple ABA procedures. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 12(2), 387–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-018-00282-w
Arnal, L., Fazzio, D., Martin, G. L., Yu, C. T., Keilback, L., & Starke, M. (2007). Instructing university students to conduct discrete-trials teaching with confederates simulating children with autism. Developmental Disabilities Bulletin, 35, 131–147.
Bailey, J. S. (1991). Marketing behavior analysis requires different talk. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24(3), 445–448. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1991.24-445
Banks, B. M., Shriver, M. D., Chadwell, M. R., & Allen, K. D. (2018). An examination of behavioral treatment wording on acceptability and understanding. Behavioral Interventions, 33(3), 260–270. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.1521
Beach, M. C., Keruly, J., & Moore, R. D. (2006). Is the quality of the patient-provider relationship associated with better adherence and health outcomes for patients with HIV? Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21(6), 661–665. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00399.x
Bearss, K., Johnson, C. R., Handen, B. L., Butter, E., Lecavalier, L., Smith, T., & Scahill, L. (2018). Parent training for disruptive behavior: The RUBI autism network, parent workbook. Oxford University Press.
Becirevic, A., Critchfield, T. S., & Reed, D. D. (2016). On the social acceptability of behavior-analytic terms: Crowdsourced comparisons of lay and technical language. The Behavior Analyst, 39(2), 305–317.
Buchanan, S. M., & Weiss, M. J. (2010). Applied behavior analysis and autism: An introduction. Autism New Jersey.
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Carr, E. G. (1996). The transfiguration of behavior analysis: Strategies for survival. Journal of Behavioral Education, 6(3), 263–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02110128
Cihon, T. M., Cihon, J. H., & Bedient, G. M. (2016). Establishing a common vocabulary of key concepts for the effective implementation of applied behavior analysis. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 9(2), 337–348.
Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (Eds.). (2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Merrill Prentice Hall.
Critchfield, T. S., Doepke, K. J., Epting, L. K., Becirevic, A., Reed, D. D., Fienup, D. M., Kremsreiter, J. L., & Ecott, C. L. (2017). Normative emotional responses to behavior analysis Jargon or how not to use words to win friends and influence people. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10(2), 97–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-016-0161-9
Critchfield, T. S., & Doepke, K. J. (2018). Emotional overtones of behavior analysis terms in English and five other languages. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 11(2), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-018-0222-3
Crockett, J. L., Fleming, R. K., Doepke, K. J., & Stevens, J. S. (2007). Parent training: Acquisition and generalization of discrete trials teaching skills with parents of children with autism. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 28(1), 23–36.
Dixon, M. R. (2014). The PEAK relational training system module 1: Direct training. Shawnee Scientific Press.
Fox, C. (1989). A stop list for general text. ACM SIGIR Forum, 24(1–2), 19–21. https://doi.org/10.1145/378881.378888
Friman, P. C. (2006). Eschew obfuscation: A colloquial description of contingent reinforcement. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 7(2), 107–109.
Friman, P. C. (2021). There is no such thing as a bad boy: The circumstances view of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 54(2), 636–653. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.816
Frost, L. & Bondy, A. (2002). The picture exchange communication system. Pyramid Educational Products, Inc.
Fryling, M. J., Wallace, M. D., & Yassine, J. N. (2012). Impact of treatment integrity on intervention effectiveness. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45(2), 449–453. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-449
Graff, R. B., & Karsten, A. M. (2012). Evaluation of a self-instruction package for conducting stimulus preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45(1), 69–82. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-69
GraphPad. (2021). GraphPad Prism (Version 9.1.0). GraphPad Software. www.graphpad.com
Grow, L. L., Carr, J. E., Gunby, K. V., Charania, S. M., Gonsalves, L., Ktaech, I. A., & Kisamore, A. N. (2009). Deviations from prescribed prompting procedures: Implications for treatment integrity. Journal of Behavioral Education, 18(2), 142–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-009-9085-6
Heckman, J. J., & Kautz, T. (2012). Hard evidence on soft skills. Labour Economics, 19(4), 451–464.
Hineline, P. N. (1980). The language of behavior analysis: Its community, its functions, and its limitations. Behaviorism, 8(1), 67–86.
Hirst, R. (2003). Scientific jargon, good and bad. Journal of technical writing and communication, 33(3), 201-229. https://doi.org/10.2190/J8JJ-4YD0-4R00-G5N0
Howard, T., Jacobson, K. L., & Kripalani, S. (2013). Doctor talk: Physicians’ use of clear verbal communication. Journal of Health Communication, 18(8), 991–1001. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2012.757398
Huck, S. W. (2012). Reading statistics and research (6th ed.). London: Pearson.
Jarmolowicz, D. P., Kahng, S., Ingvarsson, E. T., Goysovich, R., Heggemeyer, R., & Gregory, M. K. (2008). Effects of conversational versus technical language on treatment preference and integrity. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 46(3), 190–199. https://doi.org/10.1352/2008.46:190-199
Kay, M., Elkin, L., Higgins, J., Wobbrock, J. (2021). ARTool: Aligned rank transform for nonparametric factorial ANOVAs. R package version 0.11.1, https://github.com/mjskay/ARTool. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.594511
Kazdin, A. E. (1982). Single-case research designs. Oxford.
Kelly, A., & Tincani, M. (2013). Collaborative training and practice among applied behavior analysts who support individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 48(1), 120–131.
Lafasakis, M., & Sturmey, P. (2007). Training parent implementation of discrete-trial teaching: Effects on generalization of parent teaching and child correct responding. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40(4), 685–689. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2007.685-689
Leaf, J. B., Aljohani, W. A., Milne, C. M., Ferguson, J. L., Cihon, J. H., Oppenheim-Leaf, M. L., McEachin, J., & Leaf, R. (2019). Training behavior change agents and parents to implement discrete trial teaching: A Literature Review. Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 6(1), 26–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40489-018-0152-6
Leaf, J. B., Sheldon, J. B., & Sherman, J. A. (2010). Comparison of simultaneous prompting and no–no prompting in two-choice discrimination learning with children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43(2), 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2010.43-215
Leaf, J. B., Tsuji, K. H., Lentell, A. E., Dale, S. E., Kassardjian, A., Taubman, M., McEachin, J., Leaf, R., & Oppenheim-Leaf, M. L. (2013). A comparison of discrete trial teaching implemented in a one-to-one instructional format and in a group instructional format. Behavioral Interventions, 28(1), 82–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.1357
LeBlanc, L. A., Taylor, B. A., & Marchese, N. V. (2020). The training experiences of behavior analysts: Compassionate care and therapeutic relationships with caregivers. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 13(2), 387–393.
Lindsley, O. R. (1991). From technical jargon to plain English for application. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24(3), 449–458. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1991.24-449
Leys, C., & Schumann, S. (2010). A nonparametric method to analyze interactions: The adjusted rank transform test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(4), 684–688.
Lovaas, O. I. (1987). Behavioral treatment and normal educational and intellectual functioning in young autistic children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55(1), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.55.1.3
Marin-Zapata, S. I., Román-Calderón, J. P., Robledo-Ardila, C., & Jaramillo-Serna, M. A. (2021). Soft skills, do we know what we are talking about? Review of Managerial Science, 16(4), 969–1000.
Marshall, K. B., Weiss, M. J., & Critchfield, T. S. (2023). Parents' emotional responses to behavior analysis terms: A comparative analysis. [Accepted for publication].
Maurice, C. (1993). Let me hear your voice: A family’s triumph over autism. The Random House Publishing Group.
McMahon, M. X., Feldberg, Z. R., & Ardoin, S. P. (2021). Behavior analysis goes to school: Teacher acceptability of behavior-analytic language in behavioral consultation. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 14(1), 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-020-00508-w
Miranda-Linné, F., & Melin, L. (1992). Acquisition, generalization, and spontaneous use of color adjectives: A comparison of incidental teaching and traditional discrete-trial procedures for children with autism. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 13(3), 191–210.
Neuman, P. (2018). Vernacular selection: What to say and when to say it. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 34, 62–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40616-018-0097-y
Newman, B., Reeve, K. F., Reeve, S. A., & Ryan, C. S. (2003). Behaviorspeak: A glossary of terms in applied behavior analysis. Dove and Orca.
Normand, M. P., & Donohue, H. E. (2022). Behavior analytic jargon does not seem to influence treatment acceptability ratings. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.953
R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/
Rickert, V. I., Sottolano, D. C., Parrish, J. M., Riley, A. W., Hunt, F. M., & Pelco, L. E. (1988). Training parents to become better behavior managers: The need for a competency-based approach. Behavior Modification, 12(4), 475–496.
Rohrer, J. L., Marshall, K. B., Suzio, C., & Weiss, M. J. (2021). Soft skills: The case for compassionate approaches or how behavior analysis keeps finding its heart. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 14(4), 1135–1143.
Rolider, A. & Axelrod, S. (2005). The effects of “behavior speak” on public attitudes toward behavioral interventions: A cross-cultural argument for using conversational language to describe behavioral interventions to the general public. In W. L. Heward, T. E. Heron, N. A. Neef, S. M. Peterson, D. M. Sainato, G. Cartedge,…,J. C. Dardig (Eds.), Focus on behavior analysis in education: Achievement, challenges, and opportunities (pp. 283–294). Pearson Education.
Ross, D. E., & Greer, R. D. (2003). Generalized imitation and the mand: Inducing first instances of speech in young children with autism. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 24(1), 58–74.
Sarokoff, R. A., & Sturmey, P. (2004). The effects of behavioral skills training on staff implementation of discrete-trial teaching. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37(4), 535–538. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2004.37-535
Schlinger, H. D., Blakely, E., Fillhard, J., & Poling, A. (1991). Defining terms in behavior analysis: Reinforcer and discriminative stimulus. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 9, 153–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392869
Smith, T. (2001). Discrete trial training in the treatment of autism. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 16(2), 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/108835760101600204
Summers, J., & Hall, E. (2008). Impact of an instructional manual on the implementation of ABA teaching procedures by parents of children with Angelman syndrome. Journal on Developmental Disabilities, 14(2), 26.
Sundberg, M. L. (2008). Verbal behavior milestones assessment and placement program: The VB-MAPP. AVB Press.
Taylor, B. A., LeBlanc, L. A., & Nosik, M. R. (2019). Compassionate care in behavior analytic treatment: Can outcomes be enhanced by attending to relationships with caregivers? Behavior Analysis in Practice, 12(3), 654–666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-018-00289-3
Warriner, A. B., Kuperman, V., & Brysbaert, M. (2013). Norms of valence, arousal, and dominance for 13,915 English lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 45(4), 1191–1207. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0314-x
Whitcomb, S. A., Bass, J. D., & Luiselli, J. K. (2011). Effects of a computer-based early reading program (Headsprout®) on word list and text reading skills in a student with autism. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 23, 491–499.
Wobbrock, J., Findlater, L., Gergle, D., & Higgins, J. (2011). The aligned rank transform for nonparametric factorial analyses using only ANOVA procedures. In CHI’11: Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 143–146). https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1978963
Young, J. M., Krantz, P. J., McClannahan, L. E., & Poulson, C. L. (1994). Generalized imitation and response-class formation in children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(4), 685–697.
Young, K. R., Radley, K. C., Jenson, W. R., West, R. P., & Clare, S. K. (2016). Peer-facilitated discrete trial training for children with autism spectrum disorder. School Psychology Quarterly, 31(4), 507.
Acknowledgements
Thank you to Dr. David Cox for his ongoing support with statistics throughout this project and to Dr. David Palmer for his thoughtful suggestions on the study procedures and review of previous versions of the manuscript.
Funding
No funding was received for conducting this study or in the preparation of the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Kimberly Marshall conceptualized and implemented the study and prepared the first draft of the manuscript. Mary Jane Weiss, Thomas Critchfield, and Justin Leaf supported with the design of the study methodology and provided comments and feedback on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors have no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
This study was approved by the Endicott College Institutional Review Board and conforms to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1
List of Technical Terms and Their Definitions Included in the Pre-Evaluation
Term | Definition |
---|---|
Acquisition | Learning to perform a new skill |
Antecedent | What is happening in the environment immediately before a specific behavior |
Behavior | The actions of living things that can be counted |
Competing behavior | A person’s actions that interfere with that person learning a specific behavior |
Consequence | What happens in the environment immediately after a specific behavior that may or may not have an effect on the future likelihood of that behavior |
Contingent | Describes an object, activity, or privilege (can be a reward or punishment) that is provided only when the behavior is performed and is not provided when the behavior is not performed |
Contingency | An “if/then” statement that describes the cause and effect relationship between a specific behavior and what will follow that behavior |
Continuous reinforcement | The presentation of a reward after a specific behavior every single time that the behavior is performed. The presentation of the reward immediately after the behavior, makes it more likely that the person will engage in the behavior again |
Data | Information gathered about a person’s actions that guides decision-making |
Differential reinforcement | A specific action is taught by rewarding the person after the action is performed. The action is not rewarded when it is not performed |
Discrete trial | An opportunity for a person to engage in a specific action and receive a specified reward based on performing the action. This is used to teach new skills as the reward is only provided when the specific action is performed |
Discrimination | Knowing when to and when not to perform an action based on what is happening in the environment |
Distractors | Teaching materials that are presented to provide alternate, incorrect choices for a student |
Echoic | Imitating a sound, word, or phrase |
Emit | Performance of behavior that is under voluntary control and that is influenced by events that have followed the behavior in the past |
Errorless Learning | Using instructions and hints to ensure correct performance of skills and to avoid mistakes |
Fading | Systematically removing hints that are no longer needed |
Field | An array of items presented in a person’s view |
FP | Complete physical assistance with an action |
Frequency | How often an action is performed |
FV | Complete vocal assistance with an action |
Gesture | Using pointing or another physical movement to assist with an action (e.g., point to the correct response for a multiple-choice question) |
Incompatible behavior | Engaging in one action that does not allow the possibility of another action to occur at the same time |
Interresponse time | The amount of time between teaching opportunities |
Latency | How long it takes for someone to perform an action after an instruction |
Least to most prompting | A teaching strategy in which the instructor uses smaller hints to help a person perform the correct behavior unless larger hints are needed |
Mastery criteria | Conditions under which we can say a person has learned a skill |
Model | A demonstration of a behavior that serves as a cue for a person to imitate |
Most to least prompting | A teaching strategy in which the instructor uses large hints to ensure a person performs a skill correctly and then removes those hints over time |
Motivating operation | A change in the environment that influences what a person wants and what the person will do to get it |
Multiple exemplars | Using many different teaching materials to teach one concept |
Positive reinforcement | Providing something desirable immediately after a person engages in a specific action. Since this makes the learner’s life better, it increases the likelihood the person will perform the action again |
PP | Incomplete physical assistance with an action (e.g., support a hand movement from the wrist or elbow) |
Prompt | Extra cues or hints that help a person know what to do in a particular situation, make the correct response, and avoid making mistakes |
PV | Incomplete vocal assistance with an action (e.g., provide the initial sound of a word) |
Reinforcer | A pleasant object, activity, or condition that when presented immediately after an action increases the likelihood of that action being performed in the future |
Response | What a person does in reaction to a specific instruction or cue |
SD | An instruction that lets a person know a specific action will be rewarded, and therefore increases the likelihood the person will perform the action following that instruction |
Stimulus | A cue or change in the environment |
Target behavior | The actions selected for intervention |
Trial | An opportunity that includes a cue or instruction, a performance of a skill in response to the instruction, and an environmental change (e.g., reward) based on the skill performance |
Task interspersal | Mixing easy or familiar instructions with hard or new instructions |
Variable ratio | The presentation of a reward after a specified number of actions. The number of actions required to earn a reward varies around an average number |
Vocal | Saying a word aloud |
Appendix 2
Steps of Discrete Trial Teaching
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Marshall, K.B., Weiss, M.J., Critchfield, T.S. et al. Effects of Jargon on Parent Implementation of Discrete Trial Teaching . J Behav Educ (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-023-09523-7
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-023-09523-7