ArticleJournal of applied behavior analysis2026
A translational approach to investigating the effects of consequence-based procedural fidelity errors postmastery.
Article in Journal of applied behavior analysis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A translational approach to investigating the effects of consequence-based procedural fidelity errors postmastery.Journal of applied behavior analysis · 2026Article
- A parametric analysis of varying levels of consequence-based procedural fidelity errors when learning new tasks.Journal of applied behavior analysisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Procedural fidelity is the extent to which prescribed protocols are accurately and correctly implemented. Prior researchers found that consequence-based procedural fidelity errors can delay or impede learning, but not much is known about how they influence performance for tasks that have previously been mastered. The purpose of this study was to systematically replicate Falakfarsa et al. (2023) to further investigate how consequence-based errors affect performance postmastery. Twenty-four undergraduates mastered a computerized match-to-sample task under conditions of perfect fidelity (100%). Following mastery, consequence-based errors were introduced across varying levels of fidelity. For 13 participants, we observed decreased percentage of correct responses on the task in the presence of errors, with considerable intersubject variability. No effect of the independent variable was observed for 11 participants. The results suggest that error reinforcement was the more detrimental error type. We discuss the implications of the results and make several suggestions for future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.