Effects of Video Modeling on Treatment Integrity of Behavioral Interventions

Abstract

We examined the effects of individualized video modeling on the accurate implementation of behavioral interventions using a multiple baseline design across 3 teachers. During video modeling, treatment integrity improved above baseline levels; however, teacher performance remained variable. The addition of verbal performance feedback increased treatment integrity to 100% for all participants, and performance was maintained 1 week later. Teachers found video modeling to be more socially acceptable with performance feedback than alone, but rated both positively.

Training shelter volunteers to teach dog compliance

“…Although integrity improved with use of the video model, it did not reach criterion levels until feedback and modeling were provided for steps that had been omitted or performed incorrectly. The results of this study support three key findings from previous staff‐training literature: (a) Written instructions alone are insufficient to produce desired changes in staff behavior (Ducharme & Feldman, ; Gardner, ; Krumhus & Malott, ; Roscoe & Fisher, ); (b) video modeling alone may be insufficient to produce desired outcomes (DiGennaro Reed et al, ); and (c) in vivo modeling (Nigro‐Bruzzi & Sturmey, ; Sarokoff & Sturmey, ) and performance feedback (Alvero, Bucklin, & Austin, ) produce robust improvements in integrity.…”

Review and Discussion of Strategies to Address Low Trainer‐to‐Staff Ratios

“…Second, four studies demonstrated the efficacy of video modeling alone in improving staff implementation of behavioral procedures (Catania et al, 2009;Collins et al, 2009;Moore & Fisher, 2007;Vladescu et al, 2012). Finally, two studies also found that video modeling alone was effective (i.e., produced approximately 80% procedural accuracy) but that the subsequent delivery of performance feedback (DiGennaro-Reed et al, 2010) or video-based feedback (Nosik & Williams, 2011) resulted in further improvements to staff performance (i.e., produced approximately 100% procedural accuracy).…”

“…Researchers have used video modeling to teach staff or teachers a variety of skills, such as conducting a paired-stimulus preference assessment (Lavie & Sturmey, 2002), conducting a functional analysis of problem behavior (Moore & Fisher, 2007), implementing components of a behavior intervention plan (DiGennaro-Reed, Codding, Catania, & Maguire, 2010), teaching clients a problem-solving strategy (Collins, Higbee, & Salzberg, 2009), and delivering discrete-trial training (DTT; Catania et al, 2009;Nosik & Williams, 2011;Nosik, Williams, Garrido, & Lee, 2013;Vladescu, Carroll, Paden, & Kodak, 2012). Using multiple-baseline designs across participants, the researchers in eight published studies demonstrated effects of training with video models compared to baseline conditions that included written or verbal explanations, written protocols, data sheets, or pre-training with modeling and role-play (no feedback).…”

“…Second, how many steps should be depicted in video models? Past studies ranged from 7 steps (Collins et al) to 20 steps (DiGennaro-Reed et al, 2010), but often involved procedures with 8-12 steps. Like video length, video models should depict the necessary steps with minimal unnecessary or distracting information.…”

“…Additional components included written protocols, verbal instructions, feedback, and error-contingent review of video models. Four studies included passing a written competency test as a pre-requisite to video modeling (Collins et al;DiGennaro-Reed et al;Moore & Fisher, 2007;Nosik & Williams, 2011). Based on data available to date, trainers should not expect high treatment integrity given video models alone; additional training components are likely to enhance the efficacy of training for some staff members (e.g., Moore & Fisher; Catania et al; Nosik & Williams).…”