Effects of video modeling and embedded instructions to teach preference assessment procedures: A comparison
| dc.contributor.author | Hatton, Deborah | |
| dc.contributor.examiningcommittee | Hansen, Nancy (Disability Studies) | |
| dc.contributor.examiningcommittee | Martin, Toby (Psychology) | |
| dc.contributor.guestmembers | Shooshtari, Shahin (Community Health Scienes) | |
| dc.contributor.supervisor | Yu, C. T. (Dickie) | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2023-08-21T14:20:17Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2023-08-21T14:20:17Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2023-07-03 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2023-07-25T22:48:28Z | en_US |
| dc.degree.discipline | Interdisciplinary Program | en_US |
| dc.degree.level | Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) | |
| dc.description.abstract | Stimulus preference assessments are important procedures for identifying preferences with people diagnosed with intellectual disabilities and/or autism who are nonverbal. Research has shown that video modeling plus instruction was effective in teaching mediators to conduct preference assessment. The purpose of this study was to compare two ways to embed instructions into video modeling, namely, on-screen caption and voice-over instructions. Sixteen undergraduate university students participated. Participants were randomly assigned to view videos to teach paired-stimulus procedure with either on-screen or voice-over instructions and videos to teach multiple-stimulus-without-replacement procedure with either on-screen or voice-over instructions. All sessions were conducted online without in-person contact due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants’ performance was measured during baseline, at post-training, and at a one-week follow-up. During each phase, participants were shown a video of the experimenter conducting a preference assessment with a confederate, with procedural errors deliberately built into the videos, and participants were asked to identify as many procedural errors as possible. Analysis of variance at post-training showed that the difference between the on-screen and voice-over instruction groups was not statistically significant. Analysis of covariance was also not statistically significant when baseline performance was controlled. However, there was a statistically significant gain in performance between baseline and post-training, and between baseline and follow-up in both voice-over groups and on-screen groups. In a post-study feedback survey, participants felt that the goal of the study was important and felt that the videos were easy to follow but overestimated the effectiveness of the videos. Factors influencing the effectiveness of the intervention in the present study are discussed. | |
| dc.description.note | October 2023 | |
| dc.description.sponsorship | Faculty of Graduate Studies Program Completion Scholarship-University of Manitoba University of Manitoba Psychology Award-University of Manitoba Tri‐Council Top‐Up Award-University of Manitoba | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1993/37474 | |
| dc.language.iso | eng | |
| dc.rights | open access | en_US |
| dc.subject | stimulus preferance assessment | |
| dc.subject | teaching | |
| dc.subject | video modeling | |
| dc.subject | identying errors | |
| dc.title | Effects of video modeling and embedded instructions to teach preference assessment procedures: A comparison | |
| dc.type | doctoral thesis | en_US |
| local.subject.manitoba | no | |
| oaire.awardNumber | 752-2016-2035 | |
| oaire.awardTitle | SSHRC Doctoral Fellowship Award | |
| project.funder.name | Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada |