Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities - Division on ...

scores ranged from 40% to 100% with a mean
of 80.95%. In addition, n<strong>in</strong>e studies reported
the follow-up data of the <strong>in</strong>tervention. The
PND scores ranged from 60% to 100%, with a
mean of 92.15%. However, these averages
were obta<strong>in</strong>ed across five categories of <strong>in</strong>terventions,
mak<strong>in</strong>g it impossible to conclude
whether the impact of <strong>in</strong>dividual <strong>in</strong>terventions
was effectively ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>and</strong> generalized
due to limited number of studies <strong>in</strong> each
category report<strong>in</strong>g such results.
Treatment Integrity
Fourteen studies assessed the extent to which
<strong>in</strong>tervention conditions were implemented as
<strong>in</strong>tended; eleven studies actually reported
numerical data on treatment <strong>in</strong>tegrity. Researchers
<strong>in</strong> 3 studies discussed that treatment
<strong>in</strong>tegrity was monitored but provided no numerical
data. In studies <strong>in</strong> which treatment
<strong>in</strong>tegrity was reported, <strong>in</strong>terventions were implemented
with a high degree of fidelity. Because
most studies did not <strong>in</strong>clude assessment
of treatment <strong>in</strong>tegrity, we f<strong>in</strong>d it difficult to
draw def<strong>in</strong>ite conclusions that the changes <strong>in</strong>
the target behaviors are the results of the <strong>in</strong>terventions.
Also because most studies reviewed
<strong>in</strong> this article were implemented by
researchers, additional research is needed to
determ<strong>in</strong>e whether <strong>in</strong>terventions can be implemented
with high fidelity by teachers, parents,
or others. Otherwise, the generality of
these <strong>in</strong>terventions for use <strong>in</strong> the real school
sett<strong>in</strong>gs rema<strong>in</strong>s to be unclear.
Social Validity
Measures of social validity were reported <strong>in</strong> 16
studies. Most studies provided evidence for
the social importance of <strong>in</strong>tervention outcomes.
Assessment of social validity was obta<strong>in</strong>ed
either through <strong>in</strong>terviews or questionnaires.
It is important that parents <strong>and</strong>
classroom teachers believe that the selected
<strong>in</strong>tervention strategies are effective <strong>and</strong> appropriate.
If the <strong>in</strong>tervention lacks social validity,
parents <strong>and</strong> teachers are less likely to
exert the necessary effort to implement the
<strong>in</strong>tervention, thus dim<strong>in</strong>ish<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>tervention
fidelity.
Discussion
Results varied widely both between <strong>in</strong>tervention
types, <strong>and</strong> with<strong>in</strong> each <strong>in</strong>tervention type.
While Social Stories, Peer-Mediated, <strong>and</strong>
Video-Model<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>terventions all met the criteria
for evidence-based practices accord<strong>in</strong>g to
Horner et al. (2005), a closer look at PND
scores shows that only Video-Model<strong>in</strong>g meets
criteria for be<strong>in</strong>g evidence-based as well as
demonstrat<strong>in</strong>g high effectiveness as an <strong>in</strong>tervention
strategy. The PND scores of two of the
six Social Stories <strong>in</strong>tervention studies (Barry &
Burlew, 2004; Delano & Snell, 2006), <strong>and</strong>
three of the n<strong>in</strong>e Peer-Mediated <strong>in</strong>tervention
studies (Garrison-Harrell, Kamps, & Kravits,
1997; Koegel, Werner, Vismara, & Koegel,
2005; Laushey & Hefl<strong>in</strong>, 2000), demonstrated
high effectiveness. Look<strong>in</strong>g more closely at
those highly effective studies could provide
clues to implement<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>terventions <strong>in</strong> ways
that will be effective. Cognitive behavioral
tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g is another <strong>in</strong>tervention that shows
great promise; more research is needed <strong>in</strong>
this area to demonstrate both its status as an
evidence-based practice, <strong>and</strong> its overall effectiveness.
Zero Basel<strong>in</strong>e Effects
Seven out of the 36 s<strong>in</strong>gle subject studies reported
zero basel<strong>in</strong>e, by which is meant all
basel<strong>in</strong>e data are equal to zero. Such data are
problematic due to the fact that a m<strong>in</strong>or effect
could result <strong>in</strong> relatively high levels of nonoverlapp<strong>in</strong>g
data. In the case of zero basel<strong>in</strong>es,
it is often difficult to believe that “the subject
was exhibit<strong>in</strong>g no task-relevant behavior at all.
It often seems that the observational measure
was not sensitive to relevant levels of behavior
that were be<strong>in</strong>g exam<strong>in</strong>ed” (Scruggs, et al.,
1987, p. 30). Therefore, dur<strong>in</strong>g f<strong>in</strong>al data
analysis, we need to be more cognizant
whether a specific treatment was effective only
<strong>in</strong> the presence of “zero basel<strong>in</strong>e” data. In
such case, conclusions regard<strong>in</strong>g the effectiveness
of a particular treatment should be <strong>in</strong>terpreted
with caution.
Implications for Practice
338 / <strong>Education</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-September 2009
This review described a variety of <strong>in</strong>terventions
that have been developed <strong>and</strong> evaluated