Best Practices in Utilizing the Changing Criterion Design Behavior Analysis in Practice

Table Of Content

• Planning and Ongoing Assessment
• Changing Criterion Designs: Integrating Methodological and Data Analysis Recommendations
• Neurodevelopmental Disorders and Disabilities (NDD/D)
• D-5: Use single-subject experimental designs (e.g., Reversal, Multiple Baseline, Multielement, Changing Criterion) ©
• Search
• Treatment goals can include many different skill areas, such as:

Improvement was recorded 85% and 67% of the time, respectively, for these outcomes. Among records looking at only males, language was the most studied outcome at 26%, followed by cognitive and social/communication at 21% each. Among publications with mixed sexes, the most studied outcome measures were language (25%), cognitive (22%), and social/communication (21%). Pilot data revealed articles varied in the use of the changing criterion as a level of performance expected and or level of performance given differing tasks or materials. Level of performance expected refers to direct calculations of the behavior (e.g., number of cigarettes smoked per day, percent of questions completed) whereas in cases where differing tasks or materials were present for criterions the level of performance expected did not necessarily vary. To clarify, in a study conducted by Schleien et al. (1981), two adults with severe handicaps were part of a procedure to hit the dartboard with darts.

Planning and Ongoing Assessment

The magnitude of each phase should be based on responding in the previous sub-phase and professional judgment. Thus, when restricted responding is in place it is not representative of the individual’s ability and does not lead the experimenter or therapist to an appropriate criterion shift. If a criterion is shifted five data points up to increase a behavior, experimental control is demonstrated when responding increases. If the individual meets their desired outcome almost immediately after intervention implementation and is able to maintain that goal, the inappropriate intervention was used and a poor assessment of the individual’s capability and or motivation was conducted. Thus, improvements in areas such as cognition may be misleading, because both improvements on specific tasks and improvements on full-scale cognitive assessments were scored as improvements in the cognitive outcome category (Grow et al., 2011; Howard et al., 2005). In addition, some of the outcome measures had considerable overlap in definitions, such as the cognition, language, social/communication, and adaptive behavior categories, thus potentially resulting in the coding of multiple outcome measures for a similar task.

Changing Criterion Designs: Integrating Methodological and Data Analysis Recommendations

Seventy-six percent of study records had participants with only ASD, and 24% had participants in the mixed-diagnoses category. The database searches yielded a total of 2,074 entries after import to Mendeley®, and 874 entries from selected reviews and secondary reviews. Ten systematic reviews were identified and investigated for the literature search (Brunner & Seung, 2009; Dawson & Bernier, 2013; Makrygianni et al., 2018; Mohammadzaheri et al., 2015; Reichow et al., 2014, 2018; Rodgers et al., 2020; Shabani & Lam, 2013; Spreckley & Boyd, 2009; Virués-Ortega, 2010).

Neurodevelopmental Disorders and Disabilities (NDD/D)

When a behavior is followed by something that is valued (a reward), a person is more likely to repeat that behavior. In the study records reviewed, 33% had one or two participants, whereas 31% of the publications had three participants, and 13% had four. Study records with 5 to 9 participants accounted for 11% of the total and 13% had more than 10 participants.

Last but not least, we give a heartfelt thank-you to Dr. Patrick Myers for taking the time to review our work. The infrequent use of generalization seen in the Between-Groups Comparison section could be a result of the greater use of validated tools in this section of records (Cohen et al., 2006; Remington et al., 2007). Measurement tools such as VABS incorporate measures of generalization into the scale, and though not often specified as an independent measure of generalization, multiple environmental locations for the interventions (e.g., home and school) or multiple individuals interacting with the participants may have been measured. The 5-year impact factor (IF) characteristics were determined by removing duplicate journals prior to calculation. The lowest impact journal had an IF of 0.71 and the highest had an IF of 9.92. Most of the reviewed study records were from the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (55%).

The effect of ABA is defined as the measurable changes in a participant's various outcomes as a result of receiving ABA intervention. The review comprised a database search, as well as a reference search of selected reviews. A second phase of the literature search was conducted to update the sample to reflect more recent literature. A guiding document by Tricco et al. (2016) was used for direction and as a reference for conducting this review. The ensuing amount of scientific evidence has resulted in ABA being considered a “best practice” and thus endorsed by the governments of Canada and the United States for the treatment of children and youth with ASD (Government of Canada, 2018; U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 1999).

Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA)

The current scoping review spanning 770 study records showed positive and beneficial effects of ABA for children with ASD across seven outcome measures. However, only 32 (4%) assessed ABA impact, had a comparison group, and did not rely on mastery of specific skills to mark improvement. The entire cohort of records explored had few occurrences of RCTs, the “gold standard” of research. In the interest of identifying a subset of more rigorous records, a three-step filter was conducted (Fig. ​(Fig.5).5). This was not a formal assessment of study quality, but rather a way to identify the proportion of investigated studies with several specific characteristics. After removing the section of studies looking at Comparisons of ABA Techniques, as well as any studies assessing mastery or criterion, and following with a filter for any inclusion of a comparison to control or other intervention, 32 study records (4%) remained out of 770.

Phase magnitude was varied in just under half of the studies (45.7 %) and less than half of those varied magnitude two or more times between criterions (22.1 %). Approximately 85 studies (31.8 %) varied both phase length and magnitude once or more, 101 (37.8 %) varied either length or magnitude at least once, and 15 (5.6 %) did not vary either. The majority of studies used a simple AB design (63.0 %) with a small percentage using a baseline only (4.9 %), a reversal ABAB (8.3 %), a withdrawal ABA (3.4 %), or another design (21.0 %). A combination utilizing the multiple baseline design across behaviors was the most frequently encountered. Approximately 414 participants were children (45.7 %), 63 were adults (6.9 %), 3 studies with 169 participants had both child and adult age ranges (18.7 %), and 4 studies with 260 participants did not report age (28.7 %).

Treatment goals can include many different skill areas, such as:

It is vital that parents or guardians of children suspected of having an ASD seek early diagnosis and care for the child to increase any potential benefits of treatment. The recommendations for evaluation and assessment of ASD as published by the American Academy of Pediatrics (Zwaigenbaum, 2015b), and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (Volkmar, 2014) are resources that can be utilized. Remember that you play an important role in making choices about the setting or provider from which your child receives services.

The BACB also certifies Registered Behavior Technicians with a minimum of a high school diploma and 40 hours of specialized training who work only under the direct supervision of a BCBA or BCaBA. Presence of formal and or informal social validity was recorded as well as maintenance or follow-up data collection. Data was collected concerning response opportunity exceeding criterions and opportunity to fail.

This guideline is to be applied to the extent there is a state mandate or specific benefit coverage for an Adaptive Behavioral Treatment (ABT) such as Intensive Behavioral Intervention (IBI) or Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA). Essentially, the approach is based on the scientific finding that behaviors that are reinforced will increase, while those not reinforced will decrease and eventually disappear. Treatment, then, becomes about identifying and reinforcing helpful behaviors—and not reinforcing those that cause harm. Please see our insurance resources for more information about insurance and coverage for autism services. The learner receives no reinforcement for behaviors that pose harm or prevent learning.

A qualified and trained behavior analyst (BCBA) designs and directly oversees the program. They customize the ABA program to each learner's skills, needs, interests, preferences and family situation. Each time the person uses the behavior or skill successfully, they get a reward. The reward is meaningful to the individual – examples include praise, a toy or book, watching a video, access to playground or other location, and more.

Adaptive behavior treatment with protocol modification is intended to focus on the treatment of specific destructive behaviors such as gesturing or aggression. As ever in the scientific process, interventions and treatments need consistent and replicative investigations under stringent protocols to ensure the continued efficacy and generalizability of a given intervention. Department of Health and Human Services (1999), ABA is the gold standard treatment for ASD, and is funded almost exclusively across North America.