There are10 graphs attached,. Prior to each graph, there will be a brief description of the study with which it is associated. Based on that description and your interpretation of the data presented, you will write a results and discussion section. For each graph, you will describe the change in the dependent variable based on the independent variable(s) presented for the results section. This should take one paragraph. You will follow that with 2-3 paragraphs discussion what these results mean and the implication for the field of behavior analysis and society.
capture #11 For this study, glass workers were shown a computerized training video on the importance of wearing protective gear (referred to as PPE on graph).
capture #12For this study, stimulus-stimulus pairing was implemented to increase the rate of independent vocalizations in children with ASD. There were three different schedules in which the pairing trials were implemented (e.g., 5 s, 15 s, and 30 s). Data were collected on the rate of vocalizations targeted for each schedule.

.For this study, different pictorial targets were taught using different types of attention as the
reinforcer delivered to evaluate the reinforcer efficacy of each type of attention. The three attention conditions were praise, physical attention, and conversation. Data were collected on the cumulative number of targets mastered across baseline (no reinforcement) and attention-delivery (reinforcement).
capture #14 For this study, the preference of different choice contexts (child-choice, experimenter-choice, and no-choice [control]) were evaluated. Data were collected on the frequency of selections for each choice context within a concurrent-operant arrangement (meaning they were all available) to show which context would be selected most often.
capture #15 For this study, the rate of correct responding was evaluated across different tasks based on task preference. During baseline, one of three tasks was presented and the participant was able to work (or not work) as much as they wanted. During reinforcement, the only difference was an edible reinforcer was delivered for working on the task. The procedures in the second baseline phase were the same as the first. Data were collected on the rate of correct responses during each session, and the data paths depict the high-preferred (HP), moderate-preferred (MP), and low-preferred (LP) tasks.
capture #16 For this study, the percent of compliance was measured during baseline and intervention based on the type of reinforcer delivered. The three reinforcers conditions were no SR+,attention, and tangibles. Data were collected on the percent of trials in which compliance occurred across reinforcer conditions.
capture #17 For this study, the frequency of verbal disruptions was evaluated across baseline and treatment sessions. During treatment sessions, there was a criterion level set which was the maximum number of disruptions that could occur in order to still each the reinforcer at the end of the session. During baseline sessions, there was no set criterion and no reinforcers delivered. Data were collected on the frequency of disruptions across baseline and treatment phases.

For this study, the purpose was to decrease elopement. Participants were taught to return to their guardian or therapist if the “tag” they wore beeped. The beep signaled that they were too far from their guardian or therapist. The graph depicts the percentage of trials in which elopement occurred before and after training.
capture #19 For this study, sight words were taught using different prompting procedures to evaluate the efficacy of each. Data were collected on the cumulative number of sight words mastered across phases and conditions.
capture #20 For this study, sight words were taught using different prompting procedures to evaluate the efficacy of each. Data were collected on the cumulative number of sight words mastered across phases and conditions.