Assessing Parents’ Treatment Fidelity: A Survey of Practitioners in Home Settings

Abstract

Children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and other developmental disabilities may benefit from home-based interventions to promote positive, prosocial behavior. Frequently, a practitioner (e.g., behavior analyst) provides training and support to parents to achieve behavior change. When this occurs, progress-monitoring data pertaining to both treatment fidelity and child outcomes are important to deciding if supports delivered are effective. Yet, little is known about treatment fidelity assessment in this setting. In the current study, behavior analysts working across the United States in homes ( n = 314) were surveyed. Results indicate that nearly all participants reported having received some or extensive training on the importance of treatment fidelity. Most respondents also indicated that treatment fidelity is assessed in at least 30% of sessions in homes when working with parents, primarily by means of direct observation versus indirect methods. Implications for future consultation research and the practice are provided.

Comparing Multiple Methods to Measure Procedural Fidelity of Discrete-trial Instruction

“…To conclude, we acknowledge that procedural-fidelity data in behavior-analytic research remains underreported (e.g., Cymbal et al, 2022 ; Falakfarsa et al, 2022 ; Han et al, 2022 ) and that little is known about procedural-fidelity assessment in practice (Fallon et al, 2020 ). Therefore, it is likely that any assessment of procedural fidelity in research and practice is better than no assessment.…”

“…Next, the supervisor or observer creates a checklist or data collection system using those steps and conducts a direct 3 or indirect assessment of procedural fidelity. Although this process may seem straightforward, multiple reviews of behavior-analytic literature suggest that assessing procedural fidelity is not a well-established practice in research (e.g., Cymbal et al, 2022 ; Falakfarsa et al, 2022 ; Han et al, 2022 ; McIntyre et al, 2007 ; Peterson et al, 1982 ), and too little is known about procedural fidelity data collection in practice to draw conclusions (Fallon et al, 2020 ). Direct assessments of procedural fidelity involve trained observers collecting data while observing the behavior-change agent implementing the procedures live or via recording.…”

A Review of Parent-Implemented Early Start Denver Model for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

“…This study has the following limitations. First, the review discussed parent treatment fidelity, and higher levels of parent treatment fidelity may lead to more positive treatment outcomes [ 66 ]. However, two of the studies lacked specific scores for fidelity, which could limit the overall scope of the studies for this review.…”

Strengthening the research–practice loop in applied animal behavior: Introduction to the special issue

“…To ensure internal validity in research experiments and promote treatment adherence in practice, behavior analysts must measure procedural fidelity, or the extent to which procedures are implemented as designed. While procedural fidelity has been increasingly investigated and discussed in the behavioral analysis literature over the past several decades (e.g., DiGenarro Reed & Codding, 2014 ; Falakfarsa et al, 2022 ; Fallon et al, 2020 ), the topic has received little attention in applied animal behavior research and practice. Kodak et al (this issue) review the behavior‐analytic procedural fidelity literature, including basic and applied studies with human participants, and draw clear connections to applied animal behavior research and practice.…”