| Abstract: An accurate self-assessment repertoire is crucial for maintaining high standards of practice, or a scope of competence, among behavior analysts. However, procedural means to achieve this remain underexplored. Medical communities have investigated these effects and largely found that accuracy in self-assessment is poor, with an inverse relation between ratings of adequacy and experience. Regular self-assessment strengthened by feedback from standardized rubrics or expert raters is key to maintaining ethical practice and engaging in self-guided learning. Drawing on foundational values and BACB ethical standards, this study extended research from medical communities to assess self-assessment accuracy and confidence among ABA graduate students with three skills: mock exams, mock caregiver interviews, and discrete trial training with actual clients. These represented a range of familiar and unfamiliar activities for ABA professionals. Where deficits in self-assessment accuracy were found, behavior analytic tactics related to feedback and reference tools were implemented to close the gap. Several participants met criteria across the skill types for intervention, and the intervention quickly improved self-assessment across all participants. Implications for fostering a more defined scope of competence and the durability of these findings as they relate to confidence levels are discussed to inform future research on this topic. |