Because behavior analysis is a data-driven process, a critical skill for behavior analysts is accurate visual inspection and interpretation of single-case data. Study 1 was a basic study in which we increased the accuracy of visual inspection methods for A-B designs through two refinements of the split-middle (SM) method called the dual-criteria (DC) and conservative dual-criteria (CDC) methods. The accuracy of these visual inspection methods was compared with one another and with two statistical methods (Allison & Gorman, 1993;Gottman, 1981) using a computer-simulated Monte Carlo study. Results indicated that the DC and CDC methods controlled Type I error rates much better than the SM method and had considerably higher power (to detect real treatment effects) than the two statistical methods. In Study 2, brief verbal and written instructions with modeling were used to train 5 staff members to use the DC method, and in Study 3, these training methods were incorporated into a slide presentation and were used to rapidly (i.e., 15 min) train a large group of individuals (N ϭ 87). Interpretation accuracy increased from a baseline mean of 55% to a treatment mean of 94% in Study 2 and from a baseline mean of 71% to a treatment mean of 95% in Study 3. Thus, Study 1 answered basic questions about the accuracy of several methods of interpreting A-B designs; Study 2 showed how that information could be used to increase the accuracy of human visual inspectors; and Study 3 showed how the training procedures from Study 2 could be modified into a format that would facilitate rapid training of large groups of individuals to interpret single-case designs.DESCRIPTORS: assessment, behavior analysis, data analysis, interrater agreement, visual inspection One area of behavioral research that continues to be a critical component of applied behavior analysis is staff training

The development of functional analysis (FA) methodologies allows the identification of the reinforcers that maintain problem behavior and improved intervention efficacy in the form of function-based treatments. Despite the profound impact of FA on clinical practice and research, questions still remain about the methods by which clinicians and researchers interpret FA graphs. In the current study, 141 FA data sets were evaluated using the structured visual-inspection criteria developed by Hagopian et al. (1997). However, the criteria were modified for FAs of varying lengths. Interobserver agreement assessments revealed high agreement coefficients across expert judges, postdoctoral reviewers, master's-level reviewers, and postbaccalaureate reviewers. Once the validity of the modified visual-inspection procedures was established, the utility of those procedures was examined by using them to categorize the maintaining reinforcement contingency related to problem behavior for all 141 data sets and for the 101 participants who contributed to the 141 data sets.

Behavioral treatment gains established in one setting do not always maintain in other settings. The present review examines the relevance of basic and translational research to understanding failures to maintain treatment gains across settings. Specifically, studies of the renewal effect examine how transitioning away from a treatment setting could evoke a return of undesirable behavior, rather than newly trained appropriate behavior. Studies of renewal typically arrange three phases, with a response trained and reinforced under a particular set of contextual stimuli in the first phase. Next, that response is extinguished, often under a different set of contextual stimuli. Finally, that response returns despite extinction remaining in effect upon returning to the original training context or transitioning to a novel context. Thus, removing the extinction context is sufficient to produce a recurrence of the response. The findings suggest treatment effects can become specific to the context in which the treatment was delivered. This literature offers promising methods for systematically assessing the factors contributing to treatment maintenance and improving generalization of treatment gains across contexts. Therefore, the present review suggests basic and translational research on renewal provides an empirical literature to bring greater conceptual systematization to understanding generalization and maintenance of behavioral treatment.

Treatment relapse, defined as the reemergence of problem behavior after treatment, is a serious difficulty faced by clinicians. Failures of treatment integrity (i.e., failure to implement interventions as intended) are often invoked to explain the reemergence of problem behavior. Basic studies suggest that the prevailing stimulus context might also contribute. We conducted 2 experiments in which reinforcement for a target response was followed by 2 phases of extinction with different or identical stimulus contexts relative to baseline (ABA renewal). In Experiment 1, pigeons served as subjects using procedures typical of those used in basic behavioral research. Experiment 2 was designed as a translational replication of Experiment 1, and children who had been diagnosed with autism served as participants. Returning to the previously reinforced stimulus context in both species produced a clear and immediate increase of extinguished responding. These findings are consistent with previous studies that have suggested that both reinforcement contingencies and stimulus context influence the reemergence of extinguished behavior.

Resurgence is the relapse of a previously reinforced and then extinguished target response when extinguishing a more recently reinforced alternative response. We designed the present study to assess the contribution of stimulus-control and reinforcer-control processes in determining resurgence. In a modified resurgence procedure, we removed the alternative discriminative stimulus signaling alternative reinforcement when extinguishing the alternative response. This produced more abrupt resurgence of target responding than in a typical resurgence procedure maintaining the alternative discriminative stimulus when extinguishing the alternative response. The overall amount of resurgence did not differ. Importantly, a "renewal" control added and removed the alternative stimulus during extinction, identically as in the modified resurgence procedure. However, alternative responding was never reinforced, which produced no relapse of target responding. Therefore, the more abrupt resurgence with the modified procedure than with the typical procedure suggests removing the alternative stimulus reduced the competition between alternative and target responding. These findings revealed the importance of adding and removing alternative reinforcement in producing resurgence (reinforcer control) but little influence of simply adding and removing the alternative stimulus (stimulus control). These data suggest that clinicians should consider the long-term availability of the alternative response option when developing differential-reinforcement interventions.