Question: If shaping is good for teaching new behaviors (Cooper pg. 545), why is it that changing criterions are not a good design for behaviors that are not within repertoire? Does this mean that for shaping we should use multiple treatment reversal design?
Changing criterion designs are meant for behaviors that are already known by the learner. The reason being, each criterion requires the behavior to be emitted more or less. There is no shaping being done in a changing criterion design, rather, just an increase or reduction of an already known behavior. As for your second question, shaping isn't meant for one particular design; it depends on your goals and the target behaviors.
RBT Exam Prep: btexamreview.com
BCBA Exam Prep: behavioranalyststudy.com
Very helpful!!! I read the book but I just can’t understand it, thank you for your very clear explanation and for this presentation
Very welcome!
Question: If shaping is good for teaching new behaviors (Cooper pg. 545), why is it that changing criterions are not a good design for behaviors that are not within repertoire? Does this mean that for shaping we should use multiple treatment reversal design?
Changing criterion designs are meant for behaviors that are already known by the learner. The reason being, each criterion requires the behavior to be emitted more or less. There is no shaping being done in a changing criterion design, rather, just an increase or reduction of an already known behavior. As for your second question, shaping isn't meant for one particular design; it depends on your goals and the target behaviors.