The Durability of Behavior Change: Temporal Generality in Organizational Behavior Management
JAMES MORRISON, Anna Conard, & Douglas A. Johnson
Western Michigan UniversityMay 30th, 2016
Association for Behavior Analysis International 42nd Annual Convention, Chicago, IL
Correspondence: james.d64.morrison@wmich.edu

Slide 1

Slide 2Slide 3Generality of behavior can include theextension of behavior change acrosssettings, responses, and time (Foxx,2013).
Settings – when behavior establishedunder one set of conditions appears
under a novel set of conditions such asin training setting to the on the job
settingBehaviors – when a targeted behavior
such as wearing safety glasses
increases and a non-target behavior
such as wearing earplugs also
increases
Time – when behaviors persist after theintervention has been concluded

Durability of change after consultantsleave
Without a lasting change in behavior
there is little benefit to organizations
hiring consultants. Performance
improvements should not just last for as
long as the consultant or researcher ispresent.

The Durability of Behavior Change: Temporal Generality in Organizational Behavior Management
JAMES MORRISON, Anna Conard, & Douglas A. Johnson
Western Michigan University
May 30th, 2016
Association for Behavior Analysis International 42nd Annual Convention, Chicago, IL
Correspondence: james.d64.morrison@wmich.edu

Slide 4



Slide 5

Slide 6

Maintenance is the durability acrosstime in which the targeted behavior
continues to occur after the intervention
or the consultant or researcher has
been removed from the setting.
Institutionalization is the partial or fullcontinuation of an intervention by theorganization after the consultant or
researcher has left the setting.

Stokes and Baer 1977: Five of these
apply to generality across time
We will only be focusing on thosestrategies that apply to generality
across time: intervene and hope,sequential modification, introduce tomaintaining contingencies,
indiscriminable contingencies, andmediating generalization
These five as well as all subsequent
strategies will be referred to as temporal
generality tactics.

Delivery of an intervention with noprogrammed efforts to promotegenerality.
Not really a temporal generality tactic
given it requires no intentional planningbut must be included for the sake of its
common occurrence.

The Durability of Behavior Change: Temporal Generality in Organizational Behavior Management
JAMES MORRISON, Anna Conard, & Douglas A. Johnson
Western Michigan University
May 30th, 2016
Association for Behavior Analysis International 42nd Annual Convention, Chicago, IL
Correspondence: james.d64.morrison@wmich.edu

Slide 7



Slide 8

Slide 9This tactic has a very minimal level ofanalysis dedicated to promoting
generalization. An intervention isimplemented and then any
generalization is assessed, if there is nogeneralization then additional
interventions are conducted acrossconditions.
The intervention is repeated until thebehavior is reliably occurring across allsettings. If it is observed to not be
occurring at a later date then theintervention would be implementedagain.
Essentially this tactic is just the simple
repetition of an intervention whenevergenerality fails to occur.

For this tactic, natural sources ofreinforcement are identified and anintervention is designed to develop
behaviors that will be maintained bythese natural contingencies.
This plan is limited to situations in which
natural reinforcement exists at a levelthat can reliably maintain behavior.

This tactic uses reinforcement that isdelivered on an intermittent schedule
such that instances wherereinforcement will or will not bedelivered are undifferentiated to therecipient.
Lottery or incentive programs are themost common of these tactics in theOBM literature.

The Durability of Behavior Change: Temporal Generality in Organizational Behavior Management
JAMES MORRISON, Anna Conard, & Douglas A. Johnson
Western Michigan University
May 30th, 2016
Association for Behavior Analysis International 42nd Annual Convention, Chicago, IL
Correspondence: james.d64.morrison@wmich.edu

Slide 10This tactic accomplishes generalization
through the use of verbal behavior suchas rules.
Rules and rule governed behavior arecommonly used within multi-component
interventions.

Slide 11Sigurdsson and Austin (2006)
conducted a review ofinstitutionalization and theirclassification system proposed four
additional tactics that could affectwhether or not institutionalization
occurred.

Slide 12Three additional tactics that canpromote temporal generality.

The Durability of Behavior Change: Temporal Generality in Organizational Behavior Management
JAMES MORRISON, Anna Conard, & Douglas A. Johnson
Western Michigan University
May 30th, 2016
Association for Behavior Analysis International 42nd Annual Convention, Chicago, IL
Correspondence: james.d64.morrison@wmich.edu

Slide 13

• Redmon & Lockwood (1986)• Boyce & Geller (2001)• Sigurdsson & Austin (2006)

Slide 14

Each of these twelve tactics have notbeen empirically proven to increase
temporal generality thus requiring acomprehensive review of the OBM
literature.
The earliest study to attempt this was
Redmon and Lockwood in 1986
Boyce and Geller in 2001
Sigurdsson and Austin in 2006

All studies published in JOBM between
1977 and 2014 were selected for initial
review.

All intervention components wereclassified as they were described by theauthors.
Articles were scored for including any of
the 12 temporal generality tactics aswell as for specific components of thosetactics.

• JOBM 1977-2014• IOA of 95%

Slide 15Categories– Intervention– Temporal generality tactic– Components of tactic– Elapsed time to follow-up– Follow-up frequency– Follow-up duration– Social validity findings– Percentage behavior changeThe Durability of Behavior Change: Temporal Generality in Organizational Behavior Management
JAMES MORRISON, Anna Conard, & Douglas A. Johnson
Western Michigan University
May 30th, 2016
Association for Behavior Analysis International 42nd Annual Convention, Chicago, ILCorrespondence: james.d64.morrison@wmich.edu

Slide 16

Results



Most common tactics were interveneand hope (21), involvement inintervention design (17), and training
internal staff (16). Instructional design
factors (10), sequential modification (6),social validity promotion (5),indiscriminable contingencies (3),mediate generalization (3), BSA (2),formal data collection (2), formal
consequence system (1).

33 studies included feedback, training
was used in 19, incentives systems in
13, and goal setting in 12.

Average duration of data collection was
4 weeks for 48 of the 63 studies.
The remaining studies were excluded
from the average because they did notreport the follow-up period in days,weeks, months, or years.
Those that were excluded included 3
studies with follow-up lasting one year,2.5 years, and 9 years.

• ??? (21)
• Involvement inintervention design(17)• Training internal staff(16)• Instructional design
factors (10)Slide 17

Results• Feedback (33)
• Training (19)• Incentive Systems (13)• Goal setting (12)Slide 18

Results

• 4 weeks offollow-up data

The Durability of Behavior Change: Temporal Generality in Organizational Behavior Management
JAMES MORRISON, Anna Conard, & Douglas A. Johnson
Western Michigan University
May 30th, 2016
Association for Behavior Analysis International 42nd Annual Convention, Chicago, IL
Correspondence: james.d64.morrison@wmich.edu

Slide 19Results

The average time to follow-up was 5weeks, again 16 studies did not report
the time between intervention andfollow-up as days, weeks, months, oryears and were excluded from theaverage. 10 reported immediate followup, 2 did not specify, 3 were over ayear, and one was 30 weeks later.

21 studies reported weekly follow-up
data, 12 reported daily collection, and 6
reported only one follow-up measure.
The remaining studies reported annual,
twice per week, nine per day, 4-7 perday, every 4-6 weeks, or two weeks as
their frequency of follow-up datacollection

20 studies included some form of social
validity, 15 of these used a participant
or staff survey, 4 used a customer orclient survey, and 1 used a supervisor
survey. All reported satisfaction with theintervention.

• 5 weeks until
follow-up iscollected

Slide 20Results• Weekly follow-up (21)
• Daily follow-up (12)• One data point (6)Slide 21

Results• 20 Studies
collected socialvalidity data

The Durability of Behavior Change: Temporal Generality in Organizational Behavior Management
JAMES MORRISON, Anna Conard, & Douglas A. Johnson
Western Michigan University
May 30th, 2016
Association for Behavior Analysis International 42nd Annual Convention, Chicago, IL
Correspondence: james.d64.morrison@wmich.edu

Slide 22

Results• 45 greater than 101%
• 29 between 91-100%• 30 between 61-90%• 18 between 31-60%• 2 between 0-30%

Slide 23

Slide 24

Intervene and hopeas the current strategy

Among the 63 studies there were 127
performance measure reported forparticipants, settings, groups, ordependent variables.
Of these 127 measures 45 had aperformance change of 101%, 29
between 91-100%, and 30 between 6190%. 18 had measures between 3160%, and 2 had 0-30%.

With a large portion of the 311 articles
initially reviewed being laboratory
studies the fact that 53 studies collectedfollow-up data is encouraging.
Discussion of percentage ofperformance change

Majority of studies did not use temporal
generality tactics that would beexpected to improve performance
maintenance.
Follow-up is good but programming
interventions for temporal generality isnecessary.

The Durability of Behavior Change: Temporal Generality in Organizational Behavior Management
JAMES MORRISON, Anna Conard, & Douglas A. Johnson
Western Michigan University
May 30th, 2016
Association for Behavior Analysis International 42nd Annual Convention, Chicago, IL
Correspondence: james.d64.morrison@wmich.edu

Slide 25

Several tactics have been rarely used
as a part of an intervention.

Slide 26

Without further research an empirical
understanding of these temporal
generality tactics will be lacking.
If OBM hopes to maintain and grow its
reputation for generating lasting
behavior change then it must be apriority to study these tactics anddetermine how they can best becombined with our interventions.

Slide 27Only 20 studies reported some form ofsocial validity

The Durability of Behavior Change: Temporal Generality in Organizational Behavior Management
JAMES MORRISON, Anna Conard, & Douglas A. Johnson
Western Michigan University
May 30th, 2016
Association for Behavior Analysis International 42nd Annual Convention, Chicago, IL
Correspondence: james.d64.morrison@wmich.edu

Slide 28

While the average duration of follow-up
was 4 weeks, the most frequently
reported durations were one and twoweeks. There are many obstacles to thecollection of follow-up data such as thetimely demands of graduation, tenure,supervision, or new clients. The highpressure for academics to publish
frequently instead of collecting dataover the long term for single
publications is not likely to go away
anytime soon.

Slide 29

There may be additional tactics forpromoting temporal generality that havenot been highlighted in this review, suchas the difficulty of the intervention,
leader support, or behavior“champions”.
There may be other mechanisms used
to sustain change that are not available
through JOBM or other publicly
accessible resources. It is possible
some consulting firms have developed
other strategies that promote
generalization but they have not been
published in public places.

Slide 30