Manuscript Detail

View Revisions

Sanders, M. R. & Glynn, T. (1981). Training parents in behavioral self-management: An analysis of generalization and maintenance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14(3), 223-223.

Model(s) Reviewed: Triple P - Home Visiting: Child Management Training Component
Manuscript screening details
Screening decision Screening conclusion
Passes screens Eligible for review
Study design details
Rating Design Attrition Baseline equivalence Reassignment Confounding factors
Moderate Single-case design Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
Notes:

footnote194

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

The results from single-case design studies with a high or moderate rating are not factored into whether a model meets the HHS criteria unless additional criteria are met. Please read the HHS criteria for evidence-based models for more information.

footnote195

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

The study included multiple components of this parenting training program. The <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr> review focused on the Instructions + Feedback component, which was the only one adjacent to a phase that included no Triple P components (the model developers later renamed Instructions + Feedback as Child Management Training). The other phases were not reviewed for impacts.

Study characteristics
Study participants The study included five Caucasian families in the Auckland area who had at least one preschool child with persistent behavioral difficulties. On average, mothers were 26.8 years old, fathers 28.7 years old, and target children were 3.5 years old. All five families were categorized as level three on a six-level socioeconomic index scale for New Zealand, in which level one indicates high socioeconomic status.
Setting The study was conducted in Auckland, New Zealand, a metropolitan area.
Intervention services In the Instructions + Feedback phase, the therapist met once with each family in the home to instruct both parents in a sequence of behavior modification procedures: (1) get the child’s attention; (2) calmly explain what the child has done wrong; (3) describe the correct behavior and prompt the child; (4) prompt the child again if needed; (5) praise the child if he or she behaves correctly; (6) if the child continues to behave incorrectly, deliver a firm instruction describing the incorrect behavior and enforce a natural consequence, such as removing a problem toy. After this instructional visit, independent observers visited the home or the generalization setting (community locations such as day care centers, shops, or friends’ houses) about three times per week during times that parents reported child behavior problems were most common, and recorded behaviors that they reported back to the therapist. Later, after reviewing the data collected by observers, the therapist conducted home-based differential feedback sessions on the parents’ accuracy in implementing the procedures.
Comparison conditions Within the multiple baseline format, baseline observations were conducted in the family home and generalization settings.
Staff characteristics and training Sanders, the program developer, conducted all home visits for each family that participated in the program.
Funding sources Not specified.
Author affiliation The first author is the developer of this model.
Study Registration:

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: None found

Findings details

Child development and school readiness
Rating Outcome measure Effect Sample Timing of follow-up Sample size Intervention group Comparison group Group difference Effect size Statistical significance Notes
Moderate Disruptive Child Behavior - Generalization Setting
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Metropolitan Auckland, 1981 2-6 weeks 5 children Not applicable Not applicable Not Reported Not applicable Not applicable

footnote189

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

Effect of baseline vs. Instructions + Feedback conditions only

Moderate Disruptive Child Behavior - Training Setting
FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect
Metropolitan Auckland, 1981 2-6 weeks 5 children Not applicable Not applicable Not Reported Not applicable Not applicable

footnote189

Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29

Effect of baseline vs. Instructions + Feedback conditions only

Outcome measure summary

Child development and school readiness
Outcome measure Description of measure Data collection method Properties of measure

Disruptive Child Behavior - Generalization Setting

Percentage of 25-second intervals in which an observer identified a deviant child behavior such as non-compliance, complaint, aversive mands, physical aggression, opposition, or non-interaction.

Pair of independent observers in the community

Interobserver agreement: 89.5%

Disruptive Child Behavior - Training Setting

Percentage of 25-second intervals in which an observer identified a deviant child behavior such as non-compliance, complaint, aversive mands, physical aggression, opposition, or non-interaction.

Pair of independent observers in the family home

Interobserver agreement: 79.3%