Gabor Anne M, Fritz Jennifer N, Roath Christopher T, Rothe Brittany R, Gourley Denise A
University of Houston-Clear Lake.
J Appl Behav Anal. 2016 Jun;49(2):215-27. doi: 10.1002/jaba.286. Epub 2016 Jan 21.
Social validity of behavioral interventions typically is assessed with indirect methods or by determining preferences of the individuals who receive treatment, and direct observation of caregiver preference rarely is described. In this study, preferences of 5 caregivers were determined via a concurrent-chains procedure. Caregivers were neurotypical, and children had been diagnosed with developmental disabilities and engaged in problem behavior maintained by positive reinforcement. Caregivers were taught to implement noncontingent reinforcement (NCR), differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA), and differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO), and the caregivers selected interventions to implement during sessions with the child after they had demonstrated proficiency in implementing the interventions. Three caregivers preferred DRA, 1 caregiver preferred differential reinforcement procedures, and 1 caregiver did not exhibit a preference. Direct observation of implementation in concurrent-chains procedures may allow the identification of interventions that are implemented with sufficient integrity and preferred by caregivers.
行为干预的社会效度通常采用间接方法进行评估,或者通过确定接受治疗的个体的偏好来评估,而很少描述对照顾者偏好的直接观察。在本研究中,通过并发链程序确定了5名照顾者的偏好。照顾者的神经功能正常,儿童被诊断为发育障碍,并存在由正强化维持的问题行为。教导照顾者实施非连续性强化(NCR)、替代行为的区别性强化(DRA)和其他行为的区别性强化(DRO),在照顾者证明能够熟练实施干预措施后,他们选择在与儿童的会话期间实施的干预措施。三名照顾者更喜欢DRA,一名照顾者更喜欢区别性强化程序,一名照顾者没有表现出偏好。在并发链程序中对实施情况进行直接观察,可能有助于识别那些实施完整性良好且照顾者偏好的干预措施。