Evaluation of a training manual to teach multiple-stimulus preference assessment
| dc.contributor.author | Ramon, Duong | |
| dc.contributor.examiningcommittee | Martin, Garry (Psychology) Cornick, Angela (Psychology) Hrycaiko, Dennis (Kinesiology and Recreation Management) Wacker, David (Centre for Disabilities and Development, University of Iowa) | en_US |
| dc.contributor.supervisor | Yu, C.T. (Psychology) | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2014-01-10T21:13:07Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2014-01-10T21:13:07Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2014-01-10 | |
| dc.degree.discipline | Psychology | en_US |
| dc.degree.level | Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | A self-instructional training manual for conducting a multiple-stimulus without replacement (MSWO) preference assessment procedure was evaluated. The manual describes the MSWO procedure and how to summarize and interpret its results. Review questions that highlighted the key target behaviours were included at the end of each section of the manual, followed by an answer key. The manual was compared to a method description, adapted from the method sections of research articles published by DeLeon and Iwata (1996) and Roscoe, Fisher, Glover, and Volkert (2006). Eighteen undergraduate university students were assigned to two groups using a matched-pairs random assignment for the first 10 participants and random assignment for the next eight participants. Group 1 received the manual training first, followed by a crossover to the method description training if the pre-determined mastery criterion (85% correct or higher) was not met during simulated assessments. Group 2 received the training procedures in reverse order. The self-instructional manual was statistically significantly more effective than the method description in improving performance accuracy for conducting the MSWO procedure with an actor (a graduate student) simulating a person with an intellectual disability. Four out of nine participants in Group 1 met the mastery criterion after studying the manual only and one participant achieved mastery after the crossover. In contrast, none of the nine participants in Group 2 met the mastery criterion after studying the method description only and seven participants achieved mastery after the crossover. The remaining six participants all met the mastery criterion after observing a live demonstration of the procedure. Within each group, interventions were implemented in a modified multiple-baseline design across participants and the results showed that improvements occurred only after an intervention had been introduced. All participants who achieved mastery showed strong retention and generalization performances with novel actors and clients. On the social validity questionnaire, mean participant ratings showed that the manual was easier to follow and understand, and provided the necessary information for the assessment compared with the method description. The self-instructional manual has considerable potential as a low cost and effective tool to teach individuals to conduct the MSWO procedure. | en_US |
| dc.description.note | February 2014 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1993/23150 | |
| dc.language.iso | eng | en_US |
| dc.rights | open access | en_US |
| dc.subject | Training Manual | en_US |
| dc.subject | Preference Assessment | en_US |
| dc.subject | Developmental Disabilities | en_US |
| dc.title | Evaluation of a training manual to teach multiple-stimulus preference assessment | en_US |
| dc.type | doctoral thesis | en_US |