Association for Behavior Analysis International

The use of the standard celeration chart as the primary means of data collection and visual inspection of clinical data can be a challenge at times. The papers in this syposium address a few areas of research needed to continue integrating the chart into everyday practice for behavior analysts. The first paper will address the issue of time required to teach trainers to chart. The second paper in this syposium will provide actual clinical data, which was retroactively charted and then compared to the line graphs that were used to make clinical decisions. The third paper is an actual case study in precision teaching where the chart will be used to view self-monitoring data. Warning: These presentations contain images of extremely graphic scientific content.

Two groups of direct care staff were trained using a behavior skills training (BST) approach to collect data using the standard celeration chart. Both groups received the same training packagethat included instructions, modeling, rehearsal, and feedback sessions, which lasted 3 hours. All participants were permitted to practice charting and test for competency at some point following training. The only difference between groups was the competency criteria. Group 1 was required to meet an 80% correct criterion to chart a data set. Group 2 was required to meet a minimum fluency of 16 marks per minute before they were considered competent. As a control, Group 1's fluency with the chart were also documented during training and follow-up sessions. All individuals that were given the same data set to test for competency in both groups. Data sets were created to allow participants several attempts if needed to reach competency. Maintenance of charting accuracy was recorded over the course of 6 months for both groups.

There are benefits and limitations to both traditional data collection methods for discrete trial training and fluency-based measures in clinical practice. In the current study, actual clinical data from a day treatment facilityin the areas of skill acquisition and reduction of target behavior was evaluated and transferred to a Standard Celeration Chart when applicable. These cases were overseen previously by behavior analysts who were not trained in the use of standard celeration charts and therefore did not utilize them for decision making. Discrete trial acquisition targets were moved to frequency measures and evaluated and reinforced based on fluency criterion in place of percent correct criterion. An evaluation of retention, fluency, and accuracy was performed. The purpose of this analysis is to identify the benefits and limitations of the percent correct, equal-interval data analysis, and the standard celeration chart by comparing them when interpreting and collecting data. Despite consumer familiarity and therefore demand of the standard line graph for presenting data there are considerable best practice reasons for behavior analysts to utilize the standard celeration chart as the basis for treatment decision making in clinical settings.

This study examined Precision Teaching outcomes for Irish nonidentical twin 7-year-old boys with autism. The target behaviors were tacting food items and animals in French. Two learning channel sets were practiced for 3, 1-minute timings5 days a week for4 weeks: see picture/say French word and see French text/say English word. The first hypothesis was that when students self-recorded their data it would result in a higher number of correct responses emitted per minute than when the data was recorded by their tutor. The second hypothesis was that learning outcomes would generalize across3 untrained learning sets: hear English word/write French word; hear English word/say French word; and hear French word/say English word. Results showed that both participants scored 0 correct in all timed baselines probes. The first hypothesis was supported. Both participants achieved greater results when they tabulated and graphed their own data (a maximum of 62, 45, 34, and 28 correct responses per minute versus 57, 38, 28, and 23 correct responses per minute). One-month follow-up probes also showed that the data for the self-recorded targets were maintained at a higher rate than those that were tutor-recorded. The second hypothesis was also supported, whereby the results generalized across3 novel learning channels. The implications of these results are discussed.