Deviations from prescribed prompting procedures: Implications for treatment integrity

Journal of Behavioral Education

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 142-156

  Grow, Laura L ^a   Carr, James E ^a   Gunby, Kristin V ^b   Charania, Shaireen M ^b   Gonsalves, Lucita ^b   Ktaech, Inas A ^b   Kisamore, April N ^a  

^a WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Kinark Child and Family Services   (Canada)

Author keywords

Behavioral acquisition; System of least prompts; Treatment integrity

Indexed keywords

EID: 67349262003     PISSN: 10530819     EISSN: 15733513     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10864-009-9085-6     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. IG De Leon BA Iwata 1996 Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 29 519 533 10.1901/jaba.1996.29-519
2. PM Doyle M Wolery MJ Ault DL Gast 1988 System of least prompts: A literature review of procedural parameters The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps 13 28 40
3. Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1997). Peabody picture vocabulary test (3rd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
4. W Fisher CC Piazza LG Bowman LP Hagopian JC Owens L Slevin 1992 A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 25 491 498 10.1901/jaba.1992.25-491
5. Gilliam, J. (1995). Gilliam autism rating scale examiner's manual. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
6. A Holcombe M Wolery E Snyder 1994 Effects of two levels of procedural fidelity with constant time delay on children's learning Journal of Behavioral Education 4 49 73 10.1007/BF01560509
7. RD Horner I Keilitz 1975 Training mentally retarded adolescents to brush their teeth Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 8 301 309 10.1901/jaba.1975.8- 301
8. MacDuff, G. S., Krantz, P. J., & McClannahan, L. E. (2001). Prompts and prompt-fading strategies for people with autism. In C. Maurice, G. Green, & R. M. Foxx (Eds.), Making a difference: Behavioral intervention for autism (pp. 37-50). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
9. GH Noell FM Gresham KA Gansle 2002 Does treatment integrity matter: A preliminary investigation of instruction implementation and mathematics instruction Journal of Behavioral Education 11 51 67 10.1023/A:1014385321849
10. L Peterson AL Homer SA Wonderlich 1982 The integrity of independent variables in behavior analysis Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 15 477 492
11. AC Repp LE Barton AR Brulle 1981 Correspondence between effectiveness and staff use of instructions for severely retarded persons Applied Research in Mental Retardation 2 237 245 10.1016/0270-3092(81)90017-5
12. PT Sindelar MS Rosenberg RJ Wilson 1985 An adapted alternating treatments design for instructional research Education & Treatment of Children 8 67 76
13. M Steege D Wacker C McMahon 1987 Evaluation of the effectiveness and efficiency of two stimulus prompt strategies with severely handicapped students Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 18 293 299 10.1901/jaba.1987.20-293
14. EA West F Billingsley 2005 Improving the system of least prompts: A comparison of procedural variations Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities 40 131 144
15. DA Wilder J Atwell B Wine 2006 The effects of varying levels of treatment integrity on child compliance during treatment with a three-step prompting procedure Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 39 369 373 10.1901/jaba.2006.144- 05
16. Williams, K. T. (1997). Expressive vocabulary test. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance service.
17. M Wolery DL Gast 1984 Effective and efficient procedures for the transfer of stimulus control Topics in Early Childhood Special Education 4 52 77 10.1177/027112148400400305
18. M Wolery JW Shuster 1997 Instructional methods with students who have significant disabilities The Journal of Special Education 31 61 79 10.1177/002246699703100106