|
| PCH Sunday Poster Session |
| Sunday, May 26, 2024 |
| 1:00 PM–3:00 PM |
| Convention Center, 200 Level, Exhibit Hall A |
| Chair: Thomas L. Zane (University of Kansas) |
|
| 30. Review of Acceptability Measures in Contingency Management Research |
| Area: PCH; Domain: Theory |
| HYPATIA A BOLÍVAR (University of Illinois Springfield), Megan Doan (University of Illinois Springfield), Romina Trujillo (University of Illinois Springfield), Molly A Anderson (Advocates for Human Potential, Inc. ) |
| Discussant: TANYA HOUGH (The Chicago School of Professional Psychology) |
| Abstract: Contingency management (CM) involves the use of incentives, such as vouchers or prizes, to change objectively verified behavior. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have demonstrated the effectiveness of CM, particularly for changing addictive behavior. Despite consistently positive results, negative perceptions about incentive-based treatments persist, resulting in barriers to CM implementation. Prior CM reviews have focused on its effectiveness and, to our knowledge, have not reviewed acceptability (e.g., social validity measures). The goal of this study is to fill that gap because information from social validity measures may help us further improve CM and reduce implementation-related barriers. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases using keywords related to CM, treatment acceptability, and substance use and gambling. From an initial set of 1950 references, we included a final set of 74 (25 included assessments taken following implementation of CM and 49 assessed acceptability without first implementing CM). This poster will present the types and general results of acceptability measurements for the 25 assessed after implementation of CM. Results indicate that CM is largely acceptable to participants and clinicians. Studies largely employed Likert-scale and otherwise close-ended questions. Limitations of these measurements and future directions for assessing social validity of CM will be described. |
| |
|
| 32. On the Identification and Use of Social Versus Non-Social Reinforcers: A Review of Research Practices |
| Area: PCH; Domain: Theory |
| KATHERINE GRACE BRIDGES (Louisiana State University ), Samuel L Morris (Louisiana State University) |
| Discussant: TANYA HOUGH (The Chicago School of Professional Psychology) |
| Abstract: Recent research has developed several methods that are effective at identifying individualized social reinforcers and utilizing social reinforcers may be beneficial for several reasons. However, the relative likelihood of utilizing social versus non-social reinforcers in research and practice remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate how likely behavior analysts are to employ social versus non-social reinforcers in the context of research. We pursued this aim by evaluating the types of reinforcers utilized in research published during the past eight years in five applied, behavior-analytic journals. Results suggest that researchers in applied behavior analysis have been much more likely to use individualized non-social reinforcers than individualized social reinforcers. Moreover, when social reinforcers were employed, they were much more likely to be generic and not individualized. These data suggest there is room for improvement in research practices and ways of facilitating such improvement are discussed. Implications and directions for future research evaluating current practices, demonstrating the utility of social reinforcers, and comparing the utility of social versus non-social reinforcers are also discussed. |
| |
|
| 33. Descriptive Review of Continuing Education Provider's Expertise at Behavior Analytic Conferences |
| Area: PCH; Domain: Theory |
| MARGARET LEIGH AYRES (Auburn University), John T. Rapp (Auburn University), Jennifer L Cook (University of Manitoba), Sarah M. Richling (Auburn University) |
| Discussant: Thomas L. Zane (University of Kansas) |
| Abstract: Practicing as a Board Certified Behavior Analyst requires an on-going collection of continuing education units. One means by which Board Certified Behavior Analysts obtain said education is by attending state and national conferences, which invite speakers to disseminate information in their respective areas of presumed expertise. The present study provides a descriptive analysis of data related to invited speakers at conferences affiliated with the Association for Behavior Analysis International in the United States to evaluate several measures of the quality of continuing education units delivered. To accomplish this goal, we noted the number of publications on the topic for each invited speaker, H-index, and total publications. For speakers without associated publications on the topic, we included years of experience as a potential alternative demonstration of expertise. Thereafter, we converted our results to a ranking system which included: (1) beginner, (2) moderate, and (3) expert-level speakers and discussed these rankings in terms of conference quality. Finally, we discuss the allocation of the topics presented at each conference. Overall, based on our evaluation, a proportion of speakers need further evaluation in order to validate the quality of education they provide. |
| |
|
| 34. Solution Focused Brief Therapy and the Seven Dimensions of Applied Behavior Analysis: A Conceptual Comparison |
| Area: PCH; Domain: Theory |
| HILLARY ANDERSON (Bowling Green State University) |
| Discussant: TANYA HOUGH (The Chicago School of Professional Psychology) |
| Abstract: Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) focuses on changing observable behaviors rather than internal behaviors (e.g., thoughts and feelings; Cooper et al., 2020). Client thoughts and feelings are traditionally targeted during mental health talk therapy counseling (Corey, 2013). Typically, behavior analysts do not, and are not, trained to provide therapeutic interventions which address client thoughts and feelings (Cooper et al., 2020). While many mental health counseling theoretical orientations can focus on changing a client's thoughts and feelings (e.g., Gestalt therapy, Emotion-Focused Therapy, psychoanalysis) Solution Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT; de Shazer and Berg, 1986) seeks to find solutions to client problems in a present-centered, goal-oriented, actionable approach, rather than exploring past experiences and emotional states. SFBT accomplishes these observable changes by utilizing interventions such as goal setting of measurable objectives, and identifying areas of quantifiable change via scaling questions (de Shazer and Berg, 1986). This poster seeks to answer the question: is SFBT considered ABA? by comparing SFBT methodologies to the seven dimensions of ABA (Baer et al., 1968). |
| |
| |