Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
David J. Szumlanski
University of Kansas, Spring A 2016
Professor: Eric Common
Session 2
Session 3
The individual engaged in the target behavior for 13.6% of the first session,
37.7% of the second session, and 7.8% of the third session (see figure 1.1). Average
cumulative duration for the three observation sessions was calculated at 19.7%, though
the second session could potentially be anomalously long. Thus, these finding should
not be taken as indication that the individual is likely to maintain such a high average
during future observations.
Reliability was ensured through interobserver agreement. The data collected
was analyzed with the Reed and Azulay IOA system for calculating Total Duration
(Reed, D.D., & Azulay, R.L., 2011), resulting in 97.64% for combined data points,
ranging from 87.27% to 97.34%. This indicates that the IOA for the total of three
sessions is greater than that of any individual session. When calculated with mean
duration per occurrence, the resulting IOA was 93.06%
The second measurement system to be utilized was Interval Recording. The
target behavior selected was defined as any time the observed person touched his or
her face with any part of either hand for any length of time. Examples include resting
face on hand, touching ear, touching lips with one finger, and scratching nose. Nonexamples include coiling hair around fingers, touching face with writing utensil, resting
hands upon table, and taking a sip of a drink through a straw. The behavior occurred
relatively infrequently, leading observers to select partial interval recording as an
appropriate measuring tool. Data was collected over three sessions, each consisting of
six thirty-second intervals, totaling three minutes per session for a combined nineminute period of observation.
The individual engaged in the behavior during one of the observation intervals
during the first session, another one during the second session, and one time the third
session (see Figure 1.2). Markings of 100% indicate that the target behavior was
observed at any point during that interval, and markings of 0% indicate that it was not
observed at any point during the interval. Analysis of each the sessions 6 intervals
indicates that the behavior was present during 16.66% of intervals recorded during each
of the three sessions (also represented on Figure 1.2). Thus, the average for the three
sessions combined also yields observations of target behavior at 16.66%. While these
findings seem consistent and uniform, these should not be taken as indication that the
individual is likely to maintain this rate of behavior for future trials, though he or she may
come close. The intervals chosen were thirty second intervals that, when translated into
times of occurrence per minute, yielded one instance of target behavior per three
minutes, or .33 per minute. This does not necessarily indicate this frequency will be
maintained in future observation sessions. Data was recorded onto a template created
by David Szumlanski.
Figure 1.2
Session 1
Session 2
Session 3
References
IRIS Center for Training Enhancements, The. (2005). Measuring Behavior: Case Study
Unit. Retrieved on February 15, 2016 from http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/wpcontent/uploads/pdf_case_studies/ics_measbeh.pdf.
Reed, D.D., & Azulay, R.L. (2011). A Microsoft Excel 2010 Based Tool For Calculating
Interobserver Agreement. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 4(2), 45-52.