Identify Behavioral Contingency Intervention
- Which of the following best summarized the purpose of the study?
- Examine how a similar intervention increase and maintain the appropriate behavior across repeated measures without using functional behavior assessments.
- How many sessions occurred to establish baseline for Joey?
- 3 sessions
- What tools did observers use to collect data?
- Computers and real-time data
- What was Peter and Marsteller’s (2017) general definition for “problem behavior”?
- Inappropriate vocalizations, disruption, and aggression
- How did Peter and Marsteller’s (2017) operationally define “aggression”?
- Hitting, kicking, biting or scratching another person, or throwing an item or
spitting within 0.5 m of another person.
- What type of interobserver agreement method was used to calculate interobserver
agreement?
- Block-by-block agreement method
- Based on Figure 1 (p. 257), which child(ren) benefited the most from the initial healthy-contingencies intervention without changing positive rein forcers?
- Sam
- Based on Figure 1 (p. 257), Peter and Marsteller’s (2017) stated that they continued the healthy-contingency phase to 9 session of stable, reduced problem behavior to ensure that the revised treatment remained efficacious for Sam. What session number did the steady state (9 sessions of stable behavior) begin for Sam’s treatment? (Hint: Sam’s intervention phase).
- 27
- Peter and Marsteller’s (2017) stated that their intervention effects were transient for Jacob and Joey.
- True
- In two or three sentences, provide a rationale for your answer in Question 9.
- Joey found that he did not have a problem with aggression, and Jacob even though he was affected by the three problem behaviors, his situation was not as critical as for Sam. In this case, it clear that with the therapy they had undergone and the positive reaction to their results, it means it was just a matter of a short time, and the condition vanishes.