C.7: Measure efficiency (e.g., trials to criterion, cost-benefit analysis, training duration).
Free practice questions for this part of the BCBA, with an explanation for every option.
A BCBA compares two prompting procedures for teaching receptive identification. With least-to-most prompting, the learner reaches mastery after 84 trials. With progressive time delay, the learner reaches mastery after 46 trials. Both procedures produce the same accuracy at mastery. What does this comparison show?
- A. Progressive time delay produced better maintenance.Incorrect. Maintenance was not measured. Trials to criterion says nothing about it.
- B. Progressive time delay was more efficient, because it took fewer trials to reach criterion.Correct. Trials to criterion is a measure of efficiency. Reaching the same mastery level in fewer trials means more efficient instruction.
- C. The procedures cannot be compared, because both reached the same accuracy.Incorrect. When final accuracy is equal, efficiency measures such as trials to criterion are exactly what tells the two procedures apart.
- D. Least-to-most prompting was more effective because the learner practiced more.Incorrect. More trials to reach the same outcome means less efficiency, not greater effectiveness.
A clinic compares two staff training packages for implementing a token economy. Package A takes 6 hours and produces 92% treatment integrity. Package B takes 2 hours and produces 90% integrity. Both meet the clinic's 85% competency criterion. The clinical director has limited training hours. Which conclusion is best supported?
- A. Package A is preferable because it produced the higher integrity score.Incorrect. A 2-point difference above criterion probably does not justify tripling the training time when hours are limited.
- B. Package B is likely the better choice. It reached the competency criterion with one-third the training time, a favorable cost-benefit ratio.Correct. Training duration is an efficiency measure. Similar outcomes at much lower cost favor Package B.
- C. Neither package can be evaluated without trials-to-criterion data for each client.Incorrect. Staff integrity and training time are the relevant measures here. Client trials to criterion are not needed for this decision.
- D. Both packages are equivalent, so training duration is irrelevant.Incorrect. When outcomes are similar, training duration is exactly what should drive the decision.
A learner is taught four successive sets of five sight words each. The sets were matched for word length, frequency, and phonetic regularity. Trials to criterion are 60, 42, 25, and 14 for Sets 1–4. What is the most defensible interpretation?
- A. Trials to criterion is a reliability measure, and the decreasing values show improving IOA.Incorrect. Trials to criterion is an efficiency measure, not an index of measurement reliability.
- B. The later word sets were easier, so the data say nothing about the learner.Incorrect. The sets were matched for difficulty, so a steady decrease in trials to criterion cannot easily be blamed on easier words.
- C. The learner's acquisition is becoming more efficient across sets, a learning-to-learn effect.Correct. A falling trend in trials to criterion across successive sets of comparable targets shows the learner is acquiring new skills more efficiently (learning to learn).
- D. The learner is forgetting earlier sets, so fewer trials are being run.Incorrect. Trials to criterion measures how fast new targets are acquired. It is not evidence of forgetting.