Experiment 1 Figures (Commission Errors)
Ascending Fidelity First
Frequency of Target Responses
Note. These graphs depict the frequency of target responses (mouse clicks) for participants in Experiment 1 who were exposed to DRO with 60% fidelity first.
BL = baseline, FI = fixed interval, CO = DRO with commission errors, % = percent of programmed fidelity.
Frequency of Reinforcer Deliveries
Note. These graphs depict the frequency of reinforcer deliveries (points) for participants in Experiment 1 who were exposed to DRO with 60% fidelity first.
BL = baseline, FI = fixed interval, CO = DRO with commission errors, % = percent of programmed fidelity.
Frequency of Other Behavior
Note. These graphs depict frequency of mouse clicks made on the background for participants in Experiment 1 who were exposed to DRO with 60% fidelity first.
BL = baseline, FI = fixed interval, CO = DRO with commission errors, % = percent of programmed fidelity.
Descending Fidelity First
Frequency of Target Responses
Note. These graphs depict the frequency of target responses (mouse clicks) for participants in Experiment 1 who were exposed to DRO with 100% fidelity first.
BL = baseline, FI = fixed interval, CO = DRO with commission errors, % = percent of programmed fidelity.
Frequency of Reinforcer Deliveries
Note. These graphs depict the frequency of reinforcer deliveries (points) for participants in Experiment 1 who were exposed to DRO with 100% fidelity first.
BL = baseline, FI = fixed interval, CO = DRO with commission errors, % = percent of programmed fidelity.
Frequency of Other Behavior
Note. These graphs depict frequency of mouse clicks made on the background for participants in Experiment 1 who were exposed to DRO with 100% fidelity first.
BL = baseline, FI = fixed interval, CO = DRO with commission errors, % = percent of programmed fidelity.
Experiment 2 Figures (Omission Errors)
Ascending Fidelity First
Frequency of Target Responses
Note. These graphs depict the frequency of target responses (mouse clicks) for participants in Experiment 2 who were exposed to DRO with 60% fidelity first.
BL = baseline, FI = fixed interval, OM = DRO with omission errors, % = percent of programmed fidelity.
Frequency of Reinforcer Deliveries
Note. These graphs depict the frequency of reinforcer deliveries (points) for participants in Experiment 2 who were exposed to DRO with 60% fidelity first.
BL = baseline, FI = fixed interval, OM = DRO with omission errors, % = percent of programmed fidelity.
Frequency of Other Behavior
Descending Fidelity First
Frequency of Target Responses
Note. These graphs depict the frequency of target responses (mouse clicks) for participants in Experiment 2 who were exposed to DRO with 100% fidelity first.
BL = baseline, FI = fixed interval, OM = DRO with omission errors, % = percent of programmed fidelity.
Frequency of Reinforcer Deliveries
Note. These graphs depict the frequency of reinforcer deliveries (points) for participants in Experiment 2 who were exposed to DRO with 100% fidelity first.
BL = baseline, FI = fixed interval, OM = DRO with omission errors, % = percent of programmed fidelity.
Frequency of Other Behavior
Note. These graphs depict frequency of mouse clicks made on the background for participants in Experiment 2 who were exposed to DRO with 100% fidelity first.
BL = baseline, FI = fixed interval, OM = DRO with omission errors, % = percent of programmed fidelity.
Excluded Data Set from Experiment 2, Ascending Fidelity First with Omission Error
Note. These graphs depict frequency of target responses, reinforcer deliveries, and mouse clicks made on the background for participant 1119. This data set was excluded due to target responding not decreasing during DRO phases with 100% fidelity and the participant not earning at least 80% of available reinforcers during either DRO phase with 100% fidelity. BL = baseline, FI = fixed interval, OM = DRO with omission errors, % = percent of programmed fidelity.
BL = baseline, FI = fixed interval, OM = Omission errors.
References
· Arkoosh, M. K., Derby, K. M., Wacker, D. P., Berg, W., McLaughlin, T. F., & Barretto, A. (2007). A descriptive evaluation of long-term treatment integrity. Behavior Modification, 31(6), 880–895. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445507302254
· Baum, W. M. (1974). On two types of deviation from the matching law: Bias and undermatching. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 22(1), 231–242. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1974.22-231
· Bergmann, S., Kodak, T., & Harman, M. J. (2021). When do errors in reinforcer delivery affect learning? A parametric analysis of treatment integrity. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 115(2), 561–577. https://doi.org/1.1002/jeab.670
· Bergmann, S. C., Kodak, T. M., & LeBlanc, B. A. (2017). Effects of programmed errors of omission and commission during auditory-visual conditional discrimination training with typically developing children. The Psychological Record, 67(1), 109–119. https://doi.org/1.1007/s40732-016-0211-2
· Bottini, S., Morton, H., Gillis, J., & Romanczyk, R. (2020). The use of mixed modeling to evaluate the impact of treatment integrity on learning. Behavioral Interventions, 35(3), 372–391. https://doi.org/1.1002/bin.1718
· Brand, D., Henley, A. J., DiGennaro Reed, F. D., Gray, E., & Crabbs, B. (2019). A review of published studies involving parametric manipulations of treatment integrity. Journal of Behavioral Education, 28(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/1.1007/s10864-018-09311-8
· Brossart, D. F., Laird, V. C., & Armstrong, T. W. (2018). Interpreting Kendall’s Tau and Tau-U for single-case experimental designs. Cogent Psychology, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2018.1518687
· Codding, R. S., Feinburg, A. B., Dunn, E. K., & Pace, G. M. (2005). Effects of Immediate Performance Feedback on Implementation of Behavior Support Plans. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38(2), 205–219. https://doi.org/1.1901/jaba.2005.98-04
· Cook, J. E., Subramaniam, S., Brunson, L. Y., Larson, N. A., Poe, S. G., & St. Peter, C. C. (2015). Global measures of treatment integrity may mask important errors in discrete-trial training. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 8(1), 37–47. https://doi.org/1.1007/s40617-014-0039-7
· Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2019). Applied Behavior Analysis (3rd Edition). Hoboken, NJ: Pearson Education.
· DiGennaro, F. D., Martens, B. K., & McIntyre, L. L. (2005). Increasing Treatment Integrity Through Negative Reinforcement: Effects on Teacher and Student Behavior. School Psychology Review, 34(2), 220–231. https://doi.org/1.1080/02796015.2005.12086284
· DiGennaro, F. D., Martens, B. K., & Kleinmann, A. E. (2007). A comparison of performance feedback procedures on teachers’ treatment implementation integrity and students’ inappropriate behavior in special education classrooms. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40(3), 447–461. https://doi.org/1.1901/jaba.2007.40-447
· DiGennaro Reed, F. D., Reed, D. D., Baez, C. N., & Maguire, H. (2011). A parametric analysis of errors of commission during discrete-trial training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44(3), 611–615. https://doi.org/1.1901/jaba.2011.44-611
· Donnelly, M. G., & Karsten, A. M. (2017). Effects of programmed teaching errors on acquisition and durability of self‐care skills. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 50(3), 511–528. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.390
· Fallon, L. M., Collier-Meek, M. A., Sanetti, L. M. H., Feinberg, A. B., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2016). Implementation planning to promote parents’ treatment integrity of behavioral interventions for children with autism. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 26(1), 87–109. https://doi.org/1.1080/10474412.2015.1039124
· Foreman, A. P., Peter, C. C. S., Mesches, G. A., Robinson, N., & Romano, L. M. (2021). Treatment integrity failures during timeout from play. Behavior Modification, 45(6), 988–101. https://doi.org/1.1177/0145445520935392
· Foreman, A. P., Romano, L. M., Mesches, G. A., & St. Peter, C. C. (2023). A translational evaluation of commission fidelity errors on differential reinforcement of other behavior. The Psychological Record. 73, 97-104. https://doi.org/1.1007/s40732-022-00528-8
· Greer, B. D., & Shahan, T. A. (2019). Resurgence as Choice: Implications for promoting durable behavior change. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 52(3), 816–846. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.573
· Jessel, J., & Ingvarsson, E. T. (2016). Recent advances in applied research on DRO procedures. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49(4), 991–995. https://doi.org/1.1002/jaba.323
· Klingbeil, D. A., Van Norman, E. R., McLendon, K. E., Ross, S. G., & Begeny, J. C. (2019). Evaluating Tau-U with oral reading fluency data and the impact of measurement error. Behavior Modification, 43(3), 413–438. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445518760174
· Lattal, K. A., Cançado, C. R. X., Cook, J. E., Kincaid, S. L., Nighbor, T. D., & Oliver, A. C. (2017). On defining resurgence. Behavioural Processes, 141(Part 1), 85–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2017.04.018
· Lattal, K. A. (2013). The five pillars of the experimental analysis of behavior. In G. J. Madden, W. V. Dube, T. D. Hackenberg, G. P. Hanley, & K. A. Lattal (Eds.), APA handbook of behavior analysis, Vol. 1: Methods and principles. (pp. 33–63). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/1.1037/13937-002
· Mazaleski, J. L., Iwata, B. A., Vollmer, T. R., Zarcone, J. R., & Smith, R. G. (1993). Analysis of the reinforcement and extinction components in DRO contingencies with self-injury. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26(2), 143–156. https://doi.org/1.1901/jaba.1993.26-143
· McDougale, C. B., Richling, S. M., Longino, E. B., & O’Rourke, S. A. (2020). Mastery criteria and maintenance: A descriptive analysis of applied research procedures. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 13(2), 402–41. https://doi.org/1.1007/s40617-019-00365-2
· Mueller, M. M., Piazza, C. C., Moore, J. W., Kelley, M. E., Bethke, S. A., Pruett, A. E., Oberdorff, A. J., & Layer, S. A. (2003). Training parents to implement pediatric feeding protocols. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36(4), 545–562. https://doi.org/1.1901/jaba.2003.36-545
· Nevin, J. A. (1968). Differential reinforcement and stimulus control of not responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 11(6), 715–726. https://doi.org/1.1901/jeab.1968.11-715
· Nighbor, T. D., Cook, J. E., Oliver, A. C., & Lattal, K. A. (2020). Does DRO type matter?: Cycle versus resetting contingencies in eliminating responding. Behavioural Processes, 181. https://doi.org/1.1016/j.beproc.202.104257
· Peterson, L., Homer, A. L., & Wonderlich, S. A. (1982). The integrity of independent variables in behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 15(4), 477–492. https://doi.org/1.1901/jaba.1982.15-477
· QBS LLC. (2021). Safety-Care® behavioral safety training program. https://qbs.com/safety-care-crisis-prevention-training/
· Repp, A. C., Barton, L. E., & Brulle, A. R. (1983). A comparison of two procedures for programming the differential reinforcement of other behaviors. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 16(4), 435–445. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1983.16-435
· Repp, A. C., & Deitz, S. M. (1974). Reducing aggressive and self‐injurious behavior of institutionalized retarded children through reinforcement of other behaviors. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7, 313–325. https://doi.org/10.1901/ jaba.1974.7‐313
· Rey, C. N., Betz, A. M., Sleiman, A. A., Kuroda, T., & Podlesnik, C. A. (2020). The role of adventitious reinforcement during differential reinforcement of other behavior: A systematic replication. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 53(4), 2440–2449. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.678
· Roane, H. S., Falcomata, T. S., & Fisher, W. W. (2007). Applying the behavioral economics principle of unit price to DRO schedule thinning. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40(3), 529–534. https://doi.org/1.1901/jaba.2007.40-529
· Romano, L. M., & St. Peter, C. C. (2017). Omission training results in more resurgence than alternative reinforcement. The Psychological Record, 67(3), 315–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-016-0214-z
· St. Peter Pipkin, C. C., Vollmer, T. R., & Sloman, K. N. (2010). Effects of treatment integrity failures during differential reinforcement of alternative behavior: A translational model. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43(1), 47–7. https://doi.org/1.1901/jaba.201.43-47
· St. Peter, C. C., Byrd, J. D., Pence, S. T., & Foreman, A. P. (2016). Effects of treatment‐integrity failures on a response‐cost procedure. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49(2), 308–328. https://doi.org/1.1002/jaba.291
· Vannest, K.J., Parker, R.I., Gonen, O., & Adiguzel, T. (2016). Single Case Research: web based calculators for SCR analysis. (Version 2.0) [Web-based application]. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University. Retrieved Monday 16th January 2023. Available from singlecaseresearch.org
· Vollmer, T. R., Sloman, K. N., & Pipkin, C. S. P. (2008). Practical implications of data reliability and treatment integrity monitoring. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(2), 4–11. https://doi.org/1.1007/BF03391722
· Weston, R., Hodges, A., & Davis, T. N. (2018). Differential reinforcement of other behaviors to treat challenging behaviors among children with autism: A systematic and quality review. Behavior Modification, 42(4), 584–609. https://doi.org/1.1177/0145445517743487