The Experts below are selected from a list of 1803 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Stacy L. Carter - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Research on Social Validity
The Social Validity Manual, 2020Co-Authors: Stacy L. CarterAbstract:This chapter outlines the research which is conducted regarding the social appropriateness of Treatment procedures, otherwise known as Treatment Acceptability. It also describes the research regarding the other two dimensions of social validity. The three dimensions of social validity described by Wolf, which include the significance of the goals of Treatment, the appropriateness of the Treatment procedures, and the importance of the effects of Treatment, have been researched using varying methods and to varying degrees. The most thoroughly researched dimension of social validity appears to have been the social appropriateness of the Treatment procedures. This dimension has been termed Treatment Acceptability by Kazdin. The significance of the goals of Treatment appears to have received the least attention in the research literature, while the social importance of the effects of Treatment has received a good deal of attention depending upon the manner in which this dimension is defined. The research on Treatment Acceptability has produced a large amount of information on variables which may influence how a Treatment may be accepted. The importance of identifying the variables associated with high or low Treatment Acceptability lies in the fact that these variables may play an important role in the implementation of Treatments, as well as the maintenance of behavior change. Several researchers have conceptualized or empirically demonstrated the importance of Treatment Acceptability. Wolf described how Treatments that are not socially valid may cause clients to run away. Kazdin discussed how low acceptance of Treatment may deter clients from seeking out Treatment, initiating Treatment, or maintaining Treatment protocols.
-
College Students' Perceptions of Treatment Acceptability of How College Professors Deal with Disruptive Talking in the Classroom.
College student journal, 2009Co-Authors: Stacy L. Carter, Narissra M. Punyanunt-carterAbstract:This study focused on various Treatments for addressing the classroom misbehavior of disruptive talking during class lecture. The findings revealed that students found some methods of addressing this problem behavior by the instructor more acceptable than other methods of treating the behavior. College students rated the most acceptable instructor Treatment for dealing with disruptive talking was talking to the student privately after class. ********** Perlman and McCann (1998) noted that faculty members sometimes do not realize how students view their teaching. In addition, some faculty members have different perspectives from their students on what comprises good teaching. A component of good teaching involves maintaining a classroom environment that is conducive to learning. College faculty may address situations that are disruptive to the college classroom using various methods. The methods that college faculty choose may most likely be those methods which they have found to be effective in the past or that they have seen other faculty use successfully. College faculty may not realize the way in which their Treatment of disruptive classroom behaviors may be perceived by the students in the classroom. Plax and Kearney (1999) have noted that college instructors' responses to students' misbehaviors may tend to be either very strict and rigid or very lenient and permissive especially for beginning instructors. Methods This study recruited information from college students regarding the Acceptability of various methods for treating disruptive behavior in a college classroom. The methodology was similar to that of previous studies examining the Acceptability of college instructors' responses to disruptive classroom behaviors (Carter & Punyanunt-Carter, 2006a, 2006b, 2007). Sample Participants in the present study were 402 students, enrolled in a basic communication course, from a large southwestern public university. Of the 402 subjects, 177 (44%) were male, 225 (56%) were female. 378 (94%) were Caucasian, 12 (3%) were African-American, and 12 (3%) were of other ethnic origin. The scale was given in a large lecture format. Participants were told that their participation in this survey was completely voluntary and their answers would remain confidential. All participants received credit for their participation. Instrument Students were presented with a case scenario where a student was talking disruptively during a lecture in a college classroom. We asked students to rate their level of Acceptability of the four different Treatments that college teachers often employ to deal with students who talk during lecture. The students then rated the level of Acceptability of the following methods in which the professor could treat this disruptive behavior: 1. The professor waits until after the class to discuss the student talking while the professor is lecturing. The professor requests that the student not talk in future classes. 2. The professor addresses the student while the student is talking. The professor tells the student in front of the entire class that it is not appropriate to talk during the lecture and if they need to talk they should leave the room. 3. The professor tells the student that if the student continues to talk during lecture, then points will be deducted from their final course grade. 4. The professor tells the entire class that talking during lecture is inappropriate. …
-
A Distributive Model of Treatment Acceptability
Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 2008Co-Authors: Stacy L. CarterAbstract:A model of Treatment Acceptability is proposed that distributes overall Treatment Acceptability into three separate categories of influence. The categories are comprised of societal influences, consultant influences, and influences associated with consumers of Treatments. Each of these categories are defined and their inter- relationships within the proposed model of Treatment Acceptability are described. The potential benefits of a distributive model of Treatment Acceptability are discussed. Treatment Acceptability has been viewed as both a limited (Cross-Calvert &Johnston, 1990) and a highly comprehensive (Lennox & Miltenberger, 1990) concept in the evaluation of behavioral interventions. Wolf (1978) first stressed the im- portance of the concept of Treatment acceptabil- ity as a component of social validity, which he described as a necessary element for maintain- ing and expanding the use of behavioral proce- dures by society. Kazdin (1980) defined treat- ment Acceptability as judgments of Treatments by actual or potential consumers of the treat- ments, such as nonprofessionals, clients, layper- sons, and others. This definition is most in line with the limited conceptualization of Treatment Acceptability described by Cross-Calvert and Johnston, which only focuses on the evalua- tion of Treatments by the consumers of treat- ments. The more comprehensive conceptual- ization of Treatment Acceptability described by Lennox and Miltenberger incorporates fac- tors influencing Treatment Acceptability that may only be available to the practitioner de- signing or recommending the Treatment. This comprehensive view of Treatment Acceptability extends the more traditional view of treat- ment Acceptability as defined by Kazdin by incorporating factors such as the ethical guidelines of a profession, the influence of meta-analyses and literature reviews, the ex- pertise of the practitioner, practitioner history with a Treatment, and practitioner bias. Recent developments such as legislation, re- search on functional analysis of problem be- haviors, and the influence of Positive Behavior Support (PBS) models of service delivery ap- pear to have increased the need for research on Treatment Acceptability. While the consum- ers of Treatment may have access to and be influenced by these recent developments, it appears that practitioners would be more likely influenced by these factors since they may have more training in these areas and are required to remain informed of these types of developments in order to provide appropriate services. For example, most individuals who interact with computers even on a daily basis are not familiar with the most recent develop- ments in computer technology. Alternatively, a person who works as a computer technician or computer salesperson may be required to be highly knowledgeable of the latest develop- ments in computer technology in order to conduct their daily activities and thus they may be more influenced by these latest devel- opments than those within other professions. The same may be true for practitioners, who regularly make recommendations regarding behavioral Treatments, because in order for them to make appropriate and ethical recom- mendations, they need to stay informed of the latest developments in their field even more so than the consumers to whom they make recommendations. The latest developments in the field influence the recommendations made by the practitioner and in turn influ- ence the decisions made by the consumers with whom they interact. Considering the many factors that influence
-
Further conceptualization of Treatment Acceptability
Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 2008Co-Authors: Stacy L. CarterAbstract:Texas Tech University Abstract: A review and extension of previous conceptualizations of Treatment Acceptability is provided in light of progress within the area of behavior Treatment development and implementation. Factors including legisla- tion, advances in research, and service delivery models are examined as to their relationship with a compre- hensive conceptualization of Treatment Acceptability. Extensions to previously described conceptualizations of Treatment Acceptability are presented and a discussion of the potential impact of these extensions on Treatment Acceptability research is provided.
-
review of recent Treatment Acceptability research
Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 2007Co-Authors: Stacy L. CarterAbstract:With recent increases in the use of positive approaches to Treatment for individuals with developmental disabilities, it seems appropriate to review the variables that have been found to influence the Acceptability of various Treatments. Programmatic Treatments for problematic behaviors that incorporate primarily positive (reinforcement) components rather than negative (punishment) components may still be susceptible to variables found to influence the Acceptability of Treatments. Although more positive reinforcement based approaches are certainly preferred, the need to consider the right to effective Treatment is also an important component of any intervention for problematic behavior. To continually assure the right to effective Treatment, the examination of variables affecting the acceptance of Treatments continues to be an important area of research. This paper reviews the instruments that have been used to evaluate the Acceptability of Treatments as well as the variables that have shown demonstrated influence on the Acceptability of Treatments for problematic behavior. Research in the area of Treatment acceptabil- ity is relatively new to the area of education and psychology with a noticeable increase in Treatment Acceptability studies occurring dur- ing the 1980's (Elliott, 1988). Recognition of the need for research in the area of social validity became more evident with an elabora- tion of the topic in an article by Baer, Wolf, and Risley (1968). Prior to this publication, the primary emphasis with regard to educa- tional and behavioral Treatments had been Treatment efficacy (Witt, 1986). Wolf (1978) stated that social validity refers to decisions based on the social importance of interven- tions on three related levels. First, objectives of the Treatment must be socially significant in which the desired outcome is both important and pertinent. Second, Treatment procedures must be deemed as socially appropriate in that they are generally considered acceptable by society. Third, effects of the Treatment should have clinical significance. Kazdin (1980) noted that social validity research has mainly focused on the appropriateness of Treatment procedures, an area of research also known as Treatment Acceptability. The term Treatment Acceptability, a component of social validity, was defined by Kazdin as judgments of treat- ments by actual or potential consumers of the Treatments, such as nonprofessionals, clients, laypersons, and others. For the purposes of this review, Treatment Acceptability will be de- fined according to the definition proposed by Kazdin and the terms Treatment and interven- tion will be used interchangeably.
Souraya Sidani - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Contribution of Treatment Acceptability to acceptance of randomization: an exploration
Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 2015Co-Authors: Souraya Sidani, Dana R EpsteinAbstract:Rationale, aims and objectives Randomization to Treatment is viewed unfavourably by many trial participants. There is limited research that investigated factors contributing to acceptance of randomization. This study explored the influence of participants' socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, and their perceived Acceptability of the Treatments on their acceptance of randomization (i.e. willingness to be randomized) in a clinical trial. Methods Persons with insomnia (n = 383) were asked about their acceptance of randomization before and after they rated the Acceptability of behavioural therapies for managing insomnia (sleep education and hygiene booklet, stimulus control therapy and sleep restriction therapy). Socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, and Treatment Acceptability, were measured with established instruments. Logistic regression was applied to explore the association between participants' characteristics and Treatment Acceptability, and reported acceptance of randomization. Results Prior to rating Treatments' Acceptability, 54.6% of participants were willing to be randomized; socio-demographic (age and ethnicity) and clinical (severity of insomnia's impact, state anxiety, depression, vitality and mental and social functions) contributed to acceptance of randomization. After rating the Treatments' Acceptability, 87.8% of participants were unwilling to be randomized; age, severity of insomnia's impact and Acceptability of behavioural therapy were significantly associated with acceptance of randomization. Conclusions The study findings indicated that participants are likely to express unwillingness to be randomized once they receive Treatment information and rate the Acceptability of Treatments. The reported non-acceptance may influence participants' behaviour (e.g. withdrawal, non-adherence) during the trial, suggesting the need to explore alternative designs for intervention evaluation.
-
relationships between personal beliefs and Treatment Acceptability and preferences for behavioral Treatments
Behaviour Research and Therapy, 2009Co-Authors: Souraya Sidani, Joyal Miranda, Dana R Epstein, Richard R Bootzin, Jennifer Cousins, Patricia MoritzAbstract:Background The literature on preferences for behavioral interventions is limited in terms of understanding Treatment-related factors that underlie Treatment choice. The objectives of this study were to examine the direct relationships between personal beliefs about clinical condition, perception of Treatment Acceptability, and preferences for behavioral interventions for insomnia.
-
Assessment of preferences for Treatment: validation of a measure.
Research in Nursing & Health, 2009Co-Authors: Souraya Sidani, Dana R Epstein, Richard R Bootzin, Patricia Moritz, Joyal MirandaAbstract:Systematic measurement of Treatment preferences is needed to obtain well-informed preferences. Guided by a conceptualization of Treatment preferences, a measure was developed to assess Treatment Acceptability and preference. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Treatment Acceptability and Preferences (TAP) measure. The TAP measure contains a description of each Treatment under evaluation, items to rate its Acceptability, and questions about participants’ preferred Treatment option. The items measuring Treatment Acceptability were internally consistent (alpha > .80) and demonstrated validity, evidenced by a one-factor structure and differences in the scores between participants with preferences for particular interventions. The TAP measure has the potential for the assessment of Acceptability and preferences for various behavioral interventions.
Joyal Miranda - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
relationships between personal beliefs and Treatment Acceptability and preferences for behavioral Treatments
Behaviour Research and Therapy, 2009Co-Authors: Souraya Sidani, Joyal Miranda, Dana R Epstein, Richard R Bootzin, Jennifer Cousins, Patricia MoritzAbstract:Background The literature on preferences for behavioral interventions is limited in terms of understanding Treatment-related factors that underlie Treatment choice. The objectives of this study were to examine the direct relationships between personal beliefs about clinical condition, perception of Treatment Acceptability, and preferences for behavioral interventions for insomnia.
-
Assessment of preferences for Treatment: validation of a measure.
Research in Nursing & Health, 2009Co-Authors: Souraya Sidani, Dana R Epstein, Richard R Bootzin, Patricia Moritz, Joyal MirandaAbstract:Systematic measurement of Treatment preferences is needed to obtain well-informed preferences. Guided by a conceptualization of Treatment preferences, a measure was developed to assess Treatment Acceptability and preference. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Treatment Acceptability and Preferences (TAP) measure. The TAP measure contains a description of each Treatment under evaluation, items to rate its Acceptability, and questions about participants’ preferred Treatment option. The items measuring Treatment Acceptability were internally consistent (alpha > .80) and demonstrated validity, evidenced by a one-factor structure and differences in the scores between participants with preferences for particular interventions. The TAP measure has the potential for the assessment of Acceptability and preferences for various behavioral interventions.
Patricia Moritz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
relationships between personal beliefs and Treatment Acceptability and preferences for behavioral Treatments
Behaviour Research and Therapy, 2009Co-Authors: Souraya Sidani, Joyal Miranda, Dana R Epstein, Richard R Bootzin, Jennifer Cousins, Patricia MoritzAbstract:Background The literature on preferences for behavioral interventions is limited in terms of understanding Treatment-related factors that underlie Treatment choice. The objectives of this study were to examine the direct relationships between personal beliefs about clinical condition, perception of Treatment Acceptability, and preferences for behavioral interventions for insomnia.
-
Assessment of preferences for Treatment: validation of a measure.
Research in Nursing & Health, 2009Co-Authors: Souraya Sidani, Dana R Epstein, Richard R Bootzin, Patricia Moritz, Joyal MirandaAbstract:Systematic measurement of Treatment preferences is needed to obtain well-informed preferences. Guided by a conceptualization of Treatment preferences, a measure was developed to assess Treatment Acceptability and preference. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Treatment Acceptability and Preferences (TAP) measure. The TAP measure contains a description of each Treatment under evaluation, items to rate its Acceptability, and questions about participants’ preferred Treatment option. The items measuring Treatment Acceptability were internally consistent (alpha > .80) and demonstrated validity, evidenced by a one-factor structure and differences in the scores between participants with preferences for particular interventions. The TAP measure has the potential for the assessment of Acceptability and preferences for various behavioral interventions.
Richard R Bootzin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
relationships between personal beliefs and Treatment Acceptability and preferences for behavioral Treatments
Behaviour Research and Therapy, 2009Co-Authors: Souraya Sidani, Joyal Miranda, Dana R Epstein, Richard R Bootzin, Jennifer Cousins, Patricia MoritzAbstract:Background The literature on preferences for behavioral interventions is limited in terms of understanding Treatment-related factors that underlie Treatment choice. The objectives of this study were to examine the direct relationships between personal beliefs about clinical condition, perception of Treatment Acceptability, and preferences for behavioral interventions for insomnia.
-
Assessment of preferences for Treatment: validation of a measure.
Research in Nursing & Health, 2009Co-Authors: Souraya Sidani, Dana R Epstein, Richard R Bootzin, Patricia Moritz, Joyal MirandaAbstract:Systematic measurement of Treatment preferences is needed to obtain well-informed preferences. Guided by a conceptualization of Treatment preferences, a measure was developed to assess Treatment Acceptability and preference. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Treatment Acceptability and Preferences (TAP) measure. The TAP measure contains a description of each Treatment under evaluation, items to rate its Acceptability, and questions about participants’ preferred Treatment option. The items measuring Treatment Acceptability were internally consistent (alpha > .80) and demonstrated validity, evidenced by a one-factor structure and differences in the scores between participants with preferences for particular interventions. The TAP measure has the potential for the assessment of Acceptability and preferences for various behavioral interventions.
