Beneficial consumer outcomes are most likely when behavior-analytic interventions are implemented with high procedural fidelity (i.e., degree to which the procedure is implemented as intended). Video self-monitoring, which involves teaching staff members to monitor their own procedural fidelity when watching recordings of themselves, can be used to improve and maintain high procedural fidelity, but video self-monitoring requires additional staff time and resources. In-vivo self-monitoring, which involves monitoring procedural fidelity during or immediately following implementing a behavior-analytic intervention, could be a cost-effective option. However, in-vivo self-monitoring needs additional research to understand its effects on procedural fidelity. This current study analyzed the effects of in-vivo self-monitoring on the procedural fidelity of three behavior technicians implementing discrete trial instruction with children with autism. We used a nonconcurrent multiple baseline across participants design to teach participants how to score their procedural fidelity during their discrete trial instruction session. Data suggested that in-vivo self-monitoring was effective for two out of three participants, and those two participants were more likely to be accurate in their self-scored procedural fidelity. Procedural fidelity for the third participant did not increase with in-vivo or video self-monitoring, and the third participant was less likely to be accurate in their self-scored procedural fidelity. During baseline and intervention, two out of three participants were more likely to error on the consequence portion of discrete trial instruction. Results of this evaluation were used to inform the supervisors about the efficacy of self-monitoring for each staff member, and implications of using self-monitoring in practice is discussed.

Applied Behavior Analysis has experienced an increase need for practitioners at all certification levels. Most recently, a demand for the paraprofessional-level certification, the Registered Behavior Technician™ (RBT®), is being driven by state licensure and health insurance reform. This has subsequently led to pressure to quickly train paraprofessionals to work with at-need clients. While this growth is favorable for the field it means that agencies are often at odds with balancing quality and breadth of knowledge, which can negatively impact clients’ lives. Furthermore, outside of basic minimum training standards, the behavior analytic governing bodies do not currently regulate RBT trainings the way they do for higher levels of certification, leaving it up to training supervisors to determine competency. In a series of experiments, some of the concerns with respect to RBT training will be addressed. The first will determine if an online curriculum is feasible for training RBT candidates to a level of proficiency for conceptual and practical knowledge. The second thread of research will examine if Acceptance and Commitment Training can lead to gains in RBT performance. Implications for the findings as well as future directions are discussed.

The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether developmental researchers were influenced in the laboratory by the characteristics of children who participate in their research. I hypothesized that experimenters, as social partners, would adapt their speaking and other behaviors to the child’s perceived temperamental profile and language proficiency. I specifically focused on whether experimenters would adhere to the experimental laboratory procedure of two elicited imitation tasks, Feed Bear and Make a Rattle, in an archival dataset. Participants included 61 primarily white 15-month-olds. Coders transcribed infant directed speech (IDS) and analyzed transcriptions for total words, words per sentence, and percentage of words with six or more letters. The present study revealed differential correlational findings across temperamental dimensions, experimenter IDS, and elicited imitation tasks. An investigation of this kind provides new information concerning procedural fidelity and how experimenters may be influenced by their child research participants.

Measuring procedural fidelity helps behavior analysts assess staff performance and make decisions about a treatment's effectiveness. However, there is limited research comparing different methods of measuring procedural fidelity. Therefore, we systematically replicated a study that examined how procedural fidelity of discrete-trial-instruction sessions varies depending on the measurement system and calculation. We scored videos depicting behavior technicians conducting discrete-trial instruction with a child with autism and did not permit data collectors to pause, rewind, or fast-forward to simulate a live session. Specifically, we compared individual-component and global fidelity from the occurrence/nonoccurrence method and all-or-nothing by component method. Like previous research has demonstrated, our findings indicated that global values were likely to mask component errors, whereas the all-or-nothing by component method was less likely to do so. When data collected in the current study was compared to those in previous research, interobserver agreement was high for both occurrence/nonoccurrence and all-or-nothing by component methods. Overall, the procedural-fidelity values obtained from each study differed minimally. These results suggest that both measurement methods yield consistent results whether derived from recorded sessions with the ability to pause, rewind, and fast-forward or simulated live sessions. Differences that were obtained are discussed in detail with particular emphasis on connecting our findings to the utility of procedural-fidelity assessment in practice.