Assessment & Research

A Comparison of Baseline Procedures in Task Analyses.

Grauerholz-Fisher et al. (2023) · Behavior modification 2023
★ The Verdict

Let kids try each task-analysis step several times before teaching; you will see what they truly know and save teaching time.

✓ Read this if BCBAs who run task analyses or write acquisition programs for children with autism.
✗ Skip if Practitioners only measuring problem behavior without teaching chained skills.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Grauerholz-Fisher et al. (2023) compared two ways to measure what a child can already do before teaching starts.

One way lets the child try each step only once. The other way lets the child try each step many times.

They used an alternating-treatments design with kids on the spectrum to see which probe showed truer baselines.

02

What they found

Most children scored higher when they got several chances per step.

Some kids even showed they could already do parts of the task before any teaching began.

Single-opportunity probes hid those skills and made kids look less able than they were.

03

How this fits with other research

Scheithauer et al. (2020) also asked, Does my baseline choice matter? They found that re-using functional-analysis data saved time without hurting treatment plans. Emma’s team adds a new rule: within task analyses, more chances equal clearer pictures.

Cerasuolo et al. (2022) warned that higher baseline skill does not always predict better ABA outcomes. That warning feels like a contradiction, but it is not. Emma shows we must first measure the true baseline; Cerasuolo reminds us that many other child variables still shape final success.

Knutson et al. (2019) used the same alternating-treatments design to test task interspersal ratios. Both studies keep the child constant and only tweak the arrangement of trials, proving that small procedural details change learning speed.

04

Why it matters

If you start with a low picture of the child’s skills, you may place them in easier programs than they need. Switch to multiple-opportunity probes during your next task analysis. You will write goals that match real skill levels, avoid re-teaching known steps, and speed up mastery.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

During your next baseline probe, give three opportunities per step and record the best performance as the true baseline.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
alternating treatments
Population
autism spectrum disorder
Finding
positive

03Original abstract

Several methods for assessing baseline performance in chained tasks have been outlined in the literature, including the fixed-opportunity probe (FOP) and the multiple-opportunity probe (MOP). Concerns have been raised regarding how each of these methods might change the baseline performance of a task, affecting the interpretation of experimental control. The purpose of the current study was to conduct a within-subject comparison of both the FOP and MOP procedures for children with autism performing daily living and self-care skills. Results indicated that, for most participants, the MOP resulted in elevated performance during baseline compared to the FOP, and that for some participants the MOP resulted in acquisition prior to direct training. Because of the possibility that the FOP might result in suppressed baseline performance, it is recommended that in most cases clinicians and researchers use the MOP when assessing baseline performance in chained tasks in order to obtain the most accurate data.

Behavior modification, 2023 · doi:10.1177/01454455231186585