Reference no: EM133222690
QUESTION 1 What was the main research questions that Hansen and colleagues (2014) wanted to address in this weeks article (p. 193)?
QUESTION 2 How did Hansen and colleagues (2014) determine how rigorous the designs were in their study? That is what were the primary indicators of a design that was determined strong, adequate, or weak? (p. 197). What were secondary indicators.
QUESTION 3 In Hansen et al., (2014), what was the criteria (for visual analysis) for a study to be considered "weak"? (p. 193).
QUESTION 4 According to Finney's (1991) article, why should social validity be an interactive process? (p. 248).
QUESTION 5 According to Schwartz and Baer (1991), what is the concept of social validity? (p. 189)
QUESTION 6 What guidelines do Schwartz and Baer (1991) suggest be included within the procedures for social validity? (p. 201).
QUESTION 7 Many of you are currently working in the field with individuals with autism or other developmental disabilities. Consider your current professional practices, or plans for future work, and describe how you might make improvements based upon what you have learned from this week's readings.