Parametric evaluation of procedural fidelity level with combined errors during differential reinforcement of other behavior

Differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) is an intervention used to address challenging behavior; however, its effectiveness may be diminished by procedural fidelity errors. Previous research has shown that DRO effects may be robust despite marginal errors of commission and omission, but the effects of combined errors (i.e., both commission and omission errors) on the efficacy of DRO have not been investigated. The purpose of this study was to parametrically evaluate procedural fidelity level (i.e., 100, 80, 60, 40, and 20% fidelity) in DRO when implemented with combined errors in a human-operant arrangement using a reversal design. Results indicated that the DRO was efficacious for most participants when implemented with 100, 80, or 60% fidelity and inefficacious for most participants when implemented with 40% or 20% fidelity when implemented with combined errors.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
Published
2026-08-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.70077
Primary Topic
Behavioral and Psychological Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Parametric evaluation of procedural fidelity level with combined errors during differential reinforcement of other behavior

Paige O’Neill, Catalina N. Rey, Andrew R. Craig, Thomas Eilers
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
Behavioral and Psychological Studies
article

Parametric evaluation of procedural fidelity level with combined errors during differential reinforcement of other behavior

Paige O’Neill, Catalina N. Rey, Andrew R. Craig, Thomas Eilers
article en

Abstract

Differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) is an intervention used to address challenging behavior; however, its effectiveness may be diminished by procedural fidelity errors. Previous research has shown that DRO effects may be robust despite marginal errors of commission and omission, but the effects of combined errors (i.e., both commission and omission errors) on the efficacy of DRO have not been investigated. The purpose of this study was to parametrically evaluate procedural fidelity level (i.e., 100, 80, 60, 40, and 20% fidelity) in DRO when implemented with combined errors in a human-operant arrangement using a reversal design. Results indicated that the DRO was efficacious for most participants when implemented with 100, 80, or 60% fidelity and inefficacious for most participants when implemented with 40% or 20% fidelity when implemented with combined errors.

Journal of Applied Behavior AnalysisVol. 59(4)
Southern Illinois University Carbondale (US), SUNY Upstate Medical University (US), University of Nebraska Medical Center (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Behavioral and Psychological Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.