Effects of a Center-Based Parent Training Package on Parents’ Accuracy of Generalized Program Implementations at Home
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of a parent training package on parents’ accuracy of program implementations and their children’s goal achievements on parent-implemented programs at home. Parents also completed a quiz with questions about three-contingencies before and after the training. Three mother-child dyads participated in this study. All three children were 4-year-old boys with developmental delays. We employed a multiple baseline across three parent-child dyads as the primary design combined with a pretest and posttest. The individual parent training sessions consisted of office meetings and in-vivo classroom coaching sessions on program implementations. Each parent was trained individually to mastery criteria on program implementations using the Teacher Performance Rate Accuracy Scale (TPRA). After completing the parent training package, all parents acquired program implementations skills, and their program implementation skills were generalized to teach new behaviors at home with a high level of fidelity. Their quiz scores on three-term contingencies also increased to a relatively high level.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".