Explanation:
Sean is violating the ethical consideration of the least restrictive alternative. The least restrictive alternative principle states that when designing interventions, professionals should choose the intervention that is the least intrusive and restrictive while still effectively addressing the problem behavior. In this case, Sean's decision to use a contingent physical restraint as the intervention is not the least restrictive alternative. There may be other interventions or strategies that could be tried before resorting to physical restraint, such as functional behavior assessment, positive behavior support, or teaching alternative coping skills.
Explanation:
Dr. G should try to be "warmer" while maintaining his ethics and not making statements that suggest he knows more about the caller than he does. This means that he should follow the producer's suggestion of using the caller's name and a warm tone, but he should not make false statements or pretend to understand the caller's feelings more than he actually does. By doing this, Dr. G can maintain a friendly and engaging demeanor on the radio show without compromising his professional integrity.
Explanation:
Non-contingent reinforcement involves delivering stimuli with known reinforcing properties on a fixed-time or variable-time schedule, regardless of the learner's behavior. This means that the reinforcement is not contingent upon any specific behavior or response from the learner. Instead, the reinforcement is provided at predetermined intervals, regardless of what the learner is doing. This can be useful in certain situations, such as when trying to maintain a behavior or when the learner is unable to engage in the desired behavior.
Explanation:
When a problem behavior is targeted for reduction or elimination, it is important for the behavior analyst to include a replacement behavior in the intervention plan. This means identifying and teaching a more appropriate behavior to replace the problem behavior. The replacement behavior should serve the same function as the problem behavior but in a more socially acceptable way. By including a replacement behavior in the intervention plan, the behavior analyst can help the individual learn and engage in a more desirable behavior instead of the problem behavior.
Explanation:
The correct answer is Multiple-baseline across individuals design. This design involves collecting baselines on the same behavior of several persons, preferably in different settings. By doing so, it allows researchers to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between the independent variable and the behavior being studied. This design is particularly useful when it is not possible or ethical to use a control group or when the behavior being studied is rare or occurs infrequently.
Explanation:
This is because all three terms - A-B-A design, Reversal design, and Withdrawal design - refer to the same research design that involves an initial baseline phase, followed by an intervention phase, and then a return to baseline. These terms are used interchangeably to describe this type of experimental design.
Explanation:
The reason Carr and Lovaas (1983) recommended that practitioners experience any punisher personally before the treatment begins is to remind them that the technique produces physical discomfort. By experiencing it themselves, practitioners can better understand the potential impact on the student and ensure that they are using the technique appropriately and ethically. This firsthand experience serves as a reminder of the potential consequences and helps practitioners make informed decisions about its use.
Explanation:
Variation is not a factor that influences the effectiveness of punishment. Immediacy refers to how quickly the punishment is administered after the behavior, intensity refers to the severity of the punishment, and schedule refers to the consistency of the punishment. However, variation refers to the different types or forms of punishment used, and it does not directly impact the effectiveness of punishment.
Explanation:
The alternating treatments design is an experimental design where two or more conditions are presented in rapidly alternating succession, regardless of the level of response. This design allows for the comparison of the effects of different conditions on the same individual or group, by quickly switching between the conditions. It is useful in situations where it is not feasible or ethical to withdraw the treatment and provides a more efficient way to evaluate the effectiveness of different interventions or treatments.
Explanation:
A multiple-probe experimental design would be the most appropriate for evaluating the effect of video modeling on the acquisition of skills for preparing a meal by adults with developmental disabilities. This design involves introducing the intervention (video modeling) at different times for different behaviors or participants, allowing for a staggered implementation. This design is useful when it is not feasible or ethical to withdraw the intervention once it has been effective for one behavior or participant. By using a multiple probe design, researchers can assess the effectiveness of video modeling on the acquisition of meal preparation skills in a systematic and controlled manner.
Explanation:
When using behavioral momentum, behaviors selected for a high-p request sequence should be part of the learner's current repertoire. This means that the learner should already be familiar with and capable of performing these behaviors. By selecting behaviors that the learner is already proficient in, it increases the likelihood of success and reinforces the learner's confidence and motivation. Introducing new behaviors or behaviors that the learner is not familiar with may lead to frustration and decrease the effectiveness of the high-p request sequence.
