Figure - available from: Journal of Behavioral Education
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
ABA Training-Tier 2 Participants’ Percentage of Accurately Performed Steps. Note. N/A indicates no sessions conducted in that phase
Source publication
Pyramidal training is an effective model for disseminating behavior analytic skills. However, pyramidal training in research is often conducted in controlled university settings. Further, research that has evaluated the effectiveness of pyramidal training in classroom settings (see Pence et al. 2014) often focuses on improving the use of one proced...
Citations
The pyramidal training approach is a promising strategy to train behavioral interventionists in applied settings, as it maximizes efficiency of training by allowing for more trainees to learn and implement a diverse range of behavioral strategies in less time. This systematic review synthesized 30 single-case studies that evaluated pyramidal training in training practitioners to implement behavioral interventions. Results support the effectiveness of the pyramidal training model at the case, tier, and study levels across various settings, targeted skills, and participant types, particularly for improving practitioner implementation fidelity. However, strategies for promoting maintenance of trained skills, such as feedback and coaching, have not been routinely incorporated into pyramidal training procedures. Future researchers should evaluate the utility of post-training observations of implementation fidelity to determine the sustainability and most efficacious methods for promoting fidelity of trained behavioral interventions. Ultimately, the pyramidal training approach shows great promise but requires further optimization and empirical scrutiny.
Although quality guidelines for single-case intervention research emphasize the importance of concurrent baselines in multiple-baseline and multiple-probe designs, nonconcurrent variations on these designs persist in the research literature. This study describes a systematic review of special education intervention studies ( k = 406) between 1988 and 2020 that report using nonconcurrent multiple-baseline or multiple-probe designs to test interventions for individuals with disabilities ages 21 years and younger. We coded and synthesized study characteristics pertaining to participants, settings, interventions, data reporting, and contextual factors. Findings indicate the prevalence of nonconcurrent designs for intervention studies in a variety of settings addressing social and communication needs of individuals with disabilities. We discuss implications for research and practice and offer suggestions for improving the validity of nonconcurrent designs. A PRISMA-compliant abstract is available at https://osf.io/sdnj5/?view_only=f386b1fe5f14430a8d63fceed293718d .
Although quality guidelines for single-case intervention research emphasize the importance of concurrent baselines in multiple-baseline and multiple-probe designs, nonconcurrent variations on these designs persist in the research literature. This study describes a systematic review of special education intervention studies (k = 406) between 1988-2020 that report using nonconcurrent multiple-baseline or multiple-probe designs to test interventions for individuals with disabilities ages 21 years and younger. We coded and synthesized study characteristics pertaining to participants, settings, interventions, data reporting, and contextual factors. Findings indicate the prevalence of nonconcurrent designs for intervention studies in a variety of settings addressing social and communication needs of individuals with disabilities. We discuss implications for research and practice and offer suggestions for improving the validity of nonconcurrent designs. A PRISMA-compliant abstract is available at https://osf.io/sdnj5/?view_only=f386b1fe5f14430a8d63fceed293718d.
