The Experts below are selected from a list of 51 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Susan J. Simonian - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Assessing treatment acceptance: the Abbreviated Acceptability Rating Profile.
Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 1992Co-Authors: Kenneth J. Tarnowski, Susan J. SimonianAbstract:Abstract As part of a broad focus on service accountability, increased attention has been devoted to the assessment of consumer judgments of treatment acceptability. Current treatment acceptability measures are limited by item complexity and time-intensiveness. These limitations were addressed with the modification of an existing instrument (Intervention Rating Profile; Witt & Elliot, Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 13 , 59–67, 1985). Psychometric support was found for the revised measure (Abbreviated Acceptability Rating Profile; AARP) in an initial sample of parents ( N = 60) who rated child treatments. Results were replicated in a cross-validation study of a second independent sample of parents ( N = 80). A third sample of subjects was used to assess the time-intensiveness and readability of the AARP. The usefulness of the modified instrument is discussed.
Stephen N. Elliott - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Assessing Social Validity of School-Wide Positive Behavior Support Plans: Evidence for the Reliability and Structure of the Primary Intervention Rating Scale
School Psychology Review, 2009Co-Authors: Kathleen Lynne Lane, Jemma Robertson Kalberg, Allison L. Bruhn, Steven A. Driscoll, Joseph H. Wehby, Stephen N. ElliottAbstract:Abstract. This study provides initial evidence for the reliability and structural validity of scores from the Primary Intervention Rating Scale (Lane, Robertson, & Wehby, 2002), an adapted version of the Intervention Rating Profile-15 (Witt & Elliott, 1985) designed to assess faculty's perceptions of social validity of primary prevention plans prior to Intervention onset. Results indicated the Primary Intervention Rating Scale is a one-factor instrument, with high internal consistency and utility. These results were found to replicate across educators from elementary, middle, and high schools. In addition, there was a significant, positive relation between social validity and treatment integrity when examining data at the school-site level. Limitations and future directions are offered. ********** Recently a series of articles was written to delineate core quality indicators to guide the research and teaching communities in evaluating the scientific rigor of experimental, quasi-experimental (Gersten, Fuchs, Compton, Coyne, Greenwood, & Innocenti, 2005), and singlecase (Horner, Carr, Halle, McGee, Odom, & Wolery, 2005) methodologies used to investigate educational practices. These indicators were used to evaluate individual studies and provide guidelines for determining if the practice under investigation is indeed evidence- based. One of these core quality indicators is social validity. Social validity refers to the extent to which consumers (e.g., teachers, parents, and students) view a given practice as addressing socially significant goals, socially acceptable treatment procedures, and socially important Intervention outcomes (Wolf, 1978). Ideally, social validity should be assessed before Intervention onset and immediately following Intervention completion, with the latter being a more common practice (Lane, Kalberg, & Menzies, in press). Assessing social validity before conducting an Intervention may provide useful information for identifying Intervention features potentially in need of revision; determine the level of commitment or buy-in; and perhaps predict the likelihood that the Intervention will be implemented as designed (treatment integrity) and sustained over time. Namely, if the person completing the social validity measure does not view the Intervention as targeting a meaningful or realistic goal, if the procedures are viewed as too cumbersome, and/or outcomes (e.g., increased academic performance) seem improbable, it is highly likely that that the Intervention will not be implemented with fidelity (Reimers, Wacker, & Koeppl, 1987). If the Intervention is not implemented as planned, then it is possible that desired outcomes are unlikely to be realized and, consequently, the practice will not be sustained over time (Noell & Gresham, 1993). In sum, social validity may affect implementation, initial effectiveness, maintenance, and future use (Elliott, 1988). Despite the importance of social validity for all levels of prevention, it mainly has been assessed in targeted Interventions such as secondary or tertiary levels of prevention, with limited application in primary prevention efforts. For example, in the literature focusing on academic-based secondary prevention efforts and function-based Interventions at the tertiary level for students with and at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD), social validity often has been assessed using standardized Ratings scales (Lane, 2004). Standardized instruments such as the Treatment Evaluation Inventory (Kazdin, 1980), Treatment Acceptability Rating Form--Revised (Reimers, Wacker, Cooper, & DeRaad, 1992), the Intervention Rating Profile-15 (IRP-I5; Witt & Elliott, 1985), and the Behavior Intervention Rating Scale (VonBrock & Elliott, 1987) have been used to assess social validity from the teacher's perspective. In addition, the IRP-15 and Behavior Intervention Rating Scale have been designed for use with parents and psychologists. …
Kenneth J. Tarnowski - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Assessing treatment acceptance: the Abbreviated Acceptability Rating Profile.
Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 1992Co-Authors: Kenneth J. Tarnowski, Susan J. SimonianAbstract:Abstract As part of a broad focus on service accountability, increased attention has been devoted to the assessment of consumer judgments of treatment acceptability. Current treatment acceptability measures are limited by item complexity and time-intensiveness. These limitations were addressed with the modification of an existing instrument (Intervention Rating Profile; Witt & Elliot, Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 13 , 59–67, 1985). Psychometric support was found for the revised measure (Abbreviated Acceptability Rating Profile; AARP) in an initial sample of parents ( N = 60) who rated child treatments. Results were replicated in a cross-validation study of a second independent sample of parents ( N = 80). A third sample of subjects was used to assess the time-intensiveness and readability of the AARP. The usefulness of the modified instrument is discussed.
Kathleen Lynne Lane - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Assessing Social Validity of School-Wide Positive Behavior Support Plans: Evidence for the Reliability and Structure of the Primary Intervention Rating Scale
School Psychology Review, 2009Co-Authors: Kathleen Lynne Lane, Jemma Robertson Kalberg, Allison L. Bruhn, Steven A. Driscoll, Joseph H. Wehby, Stephen N. ElliottAbstract:Abstract. This study provides initial evidence for the reliability and structural validity of scores from the Primary Intervention Rating Scale (Lane, Robertson, & Wehby, 2002), an adapted version of the Intervention Rating Profile-15 (Witt & Elliott, 1985) designed to assess faculty's perceptions of social validity of primary prevention plans prior to Intervention onset. Results indicated the Primary Intervention Rating Scale is a one-factor instrument, with high internal consistency and utility. These results were found to replicate across educators from elementary, middle, and high schools. In addition, there was a significant, positive relation between social validity and treatment integrity when examining data at the school-site level. Limitations and future directions are offered. ********** Recently a series of articles was written to delineate core quality indicators to guide the research and teaching communities in evaluating the scientific rigor of experimental, quasi-experimental (Gersten, Fuchs, Compton, Coyne, Greenwood, & Innocenti, 2005), and singlecase (Horner, Carr, Halle, McGee, Odom, & Wolery, 2005) methodologies used to investigate educational practices. These indicators were used to evaluate individual studies and provide guidelines for determining if the practice under investigation is indeed evidence- based. One of these core quality indicators is social validity. Social validity refers to the extent to which consumers (e.g., teachers, parents, and students) view a given practice as addressing socially significant goals, socially acceptable treatment procedures, and socially important Intervention outcomes (Wolf, 1978). Ideally, social validity should be assessed before Intervention onset and immediately following Intervention completion, with the latter being a more common practice (Lane, Kalberg, & Menzies, in press). Assessing social validity before conducting an Intervention may provide useful information for identifying Intervention features potentially in need of revision; determine the level of commitment or buy-in; and perhaps predict the likelihood that the Intervention will be implemented as designed (treatment integrity) and sustained over time. Namely, if the person completing the social validity measure does not view the Intervention as targeting a meaningful or realistic goal, if the procedures are viewed as too cumbersome, and/or outcomes (e.g., increased academic performance) seem improbable, it is highly likely that that the Intervention will not be implemented with fidelity (Reimers, Wacker, & Koeppl, 1987). If the Intervention is not implemented as planned, then it is possible that desired outcomes are unlikely to be realized and, consequently, the practice will not be sustained over time (Noell & Gresham, 1993). In sum, social validity may affect implementation, initial effectiveness, maintenance, and future use (Elliott, 1988). Despite the importance of social validity for all levels of prevention, it mainly has been assessed in targeted Interventions such as secondary or tertiary levels of prevention, with limited application in primary prevention efforts. For example, in the literature focusing on academic-based secondary prevention efforts and function-based Interventions at the tertiary level for students with and at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD), social validity often has been assessed using standardized Ratings scales (Lane, 2004). Standardized instruments such as the Treatment Evaluation Inventory (Kazdin, 1980), Treatment Acceptability Rating Form--Revised (Reimers, Wacker, Cooper, & DeRaad, 1992), the Intervention Rating Profile-15 (IRP-I5; Witt & Elliott, 1985), and the Behavior Intervention Rating Scale (VonBrock & Elliott, 1987) have been used to assess social validity from the teacher's perspective. In addition, the IRP-15 and Behavior Intervention Rating Scale have been designed for use with parents and psychologists. …
Robert I. Gama - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Noncontingent Escape Access to Self-Reinforcement to Increase Task Engagement for Students with Moderate to Severe Disabilities
Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 2008Co-Authors: David F. Cihak, Robert I. GamaAbstract:Georgia State University Abstract: This study determined the effectiveness of noncontingent escape access to self-reinforcement, as a student-directed Intervention. Three students successfully used a break card to systematically decrease inappro- priate behavior maintained by negative reinforcement while increasing task engagement. In addition, teachers completed an Intervention Rating Profile-15 that assessed the social acceptability of this Interventions. All teachers indicated that self-reinforcement was socially acceptable for classroom settings and they would recommend it to other teachers.
-
Noncontingent Escape Access to Self-Reinforcement to
2008Co-Authors: David F. Cihak, Robert I. GamaAbstract:This study determined the effectiveness of noncontingent escape access to self-reinforcement, as a student-directed Intervention. Three students successfully used a break card to systematically decrease inappro priate behavior maintained by negative reinforcement while increasing task engagement. In addition, teachers completed an Intervention Rating Profile-15 that assessed the social acceptability of this Interventions. All teachers indicated that self-reinfcrrcement was socially acceptable for classroom settings and they would recommend it to other teachers. Implementation of antecedent-based interven- performed behaviors including aggression, dis tions diverges considerably from response- ruption, destruction, and stereotypic responses, based Interventions. Rather than imposing a Results indicated that when the inappropriate consequence following the occurrence of a behavior was observed, distinct conditions for problem behavior, antecedent-based interven- the behavior were identified in 96% of the
