Behavior Analytic Journals Research Articles

On the Identification and Use of Social versus Nonsocial Reinforcers: A Review of Research Practices

AbstractRecent research has developed efficacious methods for identifying individualized social reinforcers and utilizing social reinforcers may be beneficial for several reasons. However, the relative likelihood of utilizing social versus nonsocial reinforcers in behavior-analytic research remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate how likely behavior analysts are to employ social versus nonsocial reinforcers in the context of research. We pursued this aim by evaluating the types of reinforcers utilized in research published during the past 9 years in five applied behavior-analytic journals. Results suggest that researchers in applied behavior analysis have been more likely to use individualized nonsocial reinforcers than individualized social reinforcers. Moreover, when social reinforcers were employed, they were much more likely to be generic and not individualized. These data suggest there is room for improvement in the types of programmed reinforcement contingencies we use in research and ways of facilitating such improvement are discussed. Implications and directions for future research evaluating current practices, demonstrating the utility of social reinforcers, and comparing the utility of social versus nonsocial reinforcers are also discussed.

A Model Dependent Scoping Review of Research on Sexism and Racism in Major Behavior Analytic Journals

A Model Dependent Scoping Review of Research on Sexism and Racism in Major Behavior Analytic Journals

Is “M&M® therapy” a misnomer or a concerning truth? A descriptive analysis of the use of edible reinforcers in applied behavior analytic research

AbstractReinforcement is considered an essential component of many behavioral interventions. However, caregivers may criticize the use of edible reinforcers, particularly those viewed as unhealthy. Still, as evidenced by current attitudes toward the profession, addressing the concerns and criticisms of behavior analytic consumers is paramount. Thus, the purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which edible reinforcers are used within published behavior analytic research. To this end, we analyzed research published in six major behavior analytic journals across 3 years. Results indicate that edible reinforcement was utilized in less than one third of the studies using reinforcement often in combination with other nonedible reinforcers. However, it is important to consider potential negative externalities with the use of edible reinforcement and the need for future research on the use of edible reinforcers in clinical practice and research contexts.

The Analysis of Whose Verbal Behavior?

Recent reviews of behavior analytic journals suggest that participant demographics are inadequately described. These reviews have been limited to brief periods across several journals, emphasized specific variables (e.g., socioeconomic status), or only included specific populations. The current scoping review included all published articles in The Analysis of Verbal Behavior from 1982-2020. Six demographic variables were coded for 1888 participants across 226 articles. Despite small sample sizes (i.e., fewer than six participants in 62.3% of studies), only age (85.4%) and gender identity (71.6%) were reported for the majority of participants. Socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, and primary language were reported for fewer than 20% of participants. Over time, the number of demographic variables reported showed a slight increasing trend, although considerable variability was observed across years. These findings suggest that editors and reviewers must consider what constitutes acceptable participant characterization. Researchers might also be emboldened to extend their work to populations currently underrepresented in the journal.

Consistent Visual Analysis of Multielement Data: A Preliminary Evaluation.

Experimenters provided 33 graphical displays of hypothetical data depicted in a multielement experimental design to editorial board members of prominent, applied, behavior-analytic journals via an online survey. For each display, participants indicated (a) the presence or absence of experimental control and (b) the degree of experimental control (rated on a 1-100 scale). Each depiction varied systematically in (a) the number of data paths, (b) the number of data paths elevated above the control, (c) the mean difference between affected data paths and control conditions, and (d) the degree of variability within conditions. Correspondence among experts' ratings of experimental control was high across all presented graphical displays, supporting the reliability of visual analysis as an evaluative tool for these designs.

Geographic affiliation of authors and cooperative research in the Mexican, European, and Brazilian journal of behavior analysis

ABSTRACT Publication trends in prominent behavior-analytic journals developed in the United States of America have shown that most of its research has been produced by authors with North American affiliations. The geographic affiliation of authors who have contributed research to the Mexican Journal of Behavior Analysis (MJBA), European Journal of Behavior Analysis (EJBA), and Brazilian Journal of Behavior Analysis (BJBA) – all of which are housed outside of the United States of America – are currently unknown. We examined articles published in these journals from their inception through 2020 to determine the geographic locations of authors’ listed affiliations. We found that 70% and 90% of publications in the MJBA and BJBA, respectively, were from researchers with Latin American affiliations. The EJBA had 58% and 42% of publications from researchers with North American and European affiliations, respectively. The articles were also analyzed to determine if they were co-authored by researchers from different geographic regions. The data show that 11, 6, and 3% of articles published in EJBA, MJBA, and BJBA, respectively, were cooperative.

Editors' perspectives on the selection of reviewers and the quality of reviews.

This article describes the outcomes of a survey of 93 editors in chief and associate editors of behavior-analytic journals. We sought information about variables that influence their judgment of the selection of reviewers, selection of review panels, and quality of reviews. When selecting reviewers, participants rated highly expertise on the topic, history of conducting good reviews, and history of writing constructive and respectful reviews. When selecting review panels, participants rated highly stratifying reviewers based on their expertise, avoiding conflicts of interest, and the matching based on the area of expertise between reviewers and authors. When evaluating the quality of a review, participants rated highly considerations related to research design, the science underlying the main idea, and accurate interpretations of the data. Participants did not rate copyediting as important. Overall, the extent to which reviewer selection was influenced by membership in underrepresented groups varied. These findings can inform the development of training programs for teaching peer-review repertoires.

International publication trends in basic, applied, and conceptual behavior-analytic journals.

The analysis of international and collaborative publication trends in prominent behavior-analytic journals has been a topic of interest for behavioral researchers. This paper focuses on publication trends from 1997 through 2020 in three prominent journals: Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior (JEAB), Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (JABA), and Perspectives on Behavior Science (PBS). The variable of interest was the percentage of articles published per geographical category-Australasia/East Asia, Europe, Latin America, Middle East, North America, and Africa. The results showed that 79, 96, and 87% of the published articles in JEAB, JABA, and PBS, respectively, were conducted by researchers with a North American affiliation. Furthermore, 12, 4, and 4% of the articles in JEAB, JABA, and PBS, respectively, were coauthored by at least two researchers from different geographical categories.

On a persisting curious double standard in behavior analysis: Behavioral scholars' perspectives on procedural fidelity.

Procedural fidelity is the extent to which independent variables are implemented as designed. Despite 40 years of discussion about the importance of procedural fidelity for behavioral research, reporting of fidelity data remains an uncommon practice in behavior-analytic journals. Researchers have speculated about reasons for underreporting, but the perspectives of scholars about when reporting is warranted or necessary have not yet been explored. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate possible reasons for infrequent reporting of fidelity data in behavior-analytic studies. To address this purpose, we conducted focus groups with scholars in applied behavior analysis. Five themes emerged regarding why procedural fidelity data are not typically reported. We provide a discussion about how these themes are interrelated and offer suggestions and recommendations to assist with the collection and reporting of fidelity data.

Interobserver agreement and procedural fidelity: An odd asymmetry.

We examined articles with experiments published in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis and in Behavior Analysis in Practice from 2017 through 2021 to determine how frequently procedural fidelity was assessed. When procedural fidelity was assessed, we determined how often a measure of interobserver agreement for those fidelity data was provided. We also determined how often a measure of interobserver agreement for participants' behavior was provided. Across both journals and all years, 54.7% of relevant articles provided a measure of procedural fidelity. Of them, 17.7% provided a measure of interobserver agreement for procedural fidelity. In marked contrast, 96.4% provided interobserver agreement data for participants' behavior. It is unfortunate that applied behavior analysts frequently fail to provide procedural fidelity data and, when they do, often fail to provide interobserver agreement data for the fidelity data. Reviewers for, and editors of, behavior-analytic journals are encouraged to strongly consider the relative value of procedural fidelity and agreement on procedural fidelity measures when rendering recommendations on the suitability of a given submission.

Trends in Reporting Procedural Integrity: A Comparison.

Procedural integrity refers to the extent to which an independent variable is implemented as described. Measuring procedural integrity is one important factor when considering internal and external validity of experiments. Experimental articles in behavior-analytic journals have rarely reported procedural-integrity data. The purpose of this study was to update previous reviews of whether articles published in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis reported procedural integrity, spanning a period from 1980 to 2020, and compare reporting in JABA to recent reviews of studies published in Behavior Analysis in Practice (2008-2019) and the Journal of Organizational Behavior Management (2000-2020). Procedural integrity continues to be underreported across all three journals, but an increasing trend in reporting procedural integrity is evident inthe Journal ofAppliedBehaviorAnalysis and BehaviorAnalysis inPractice. In addition to our recommendations and implications for research and practice, we provide examples and resources to assist researchers and practitioners with recording and reporting integrity data.

The Impact of Academic Publication: Inequity for Women in Behavior Analytic Journals

The number of women in higher education has increased over the past few decades but are still not at an equal level to their male counterparts, especially at the tenured level. One area of note within the tenure process is research. This area is highly valued by certain universities and could shed light on discrepancies in the number of female faculty as the faculty position becomes more prestigious. The author downloaded 21 years of publication data for seven prestigious behavior analytic journals and used quantitative methods to determine if the rates of publication differed between a previous study and today. There were 8,778 final articles yielding 27,225 authors in total. Data showed that women are represented more frequently overall, across time and all journals, less frequently in prestigious authorship positions, and more often when the sex of the editor at the time of publication was also female. While women's participation has increased over time, and since the original study, there is still disproportionate representation compared to the entirety of the field, in the order of authorship positions, and for editor-in-chief positions.

European Journal of Behavior Analysis: women, men, and authorship

ABSTRACT The European Journal of Behavior Analysis was analyzed to determine the gender of authors from 2000 through 2020. We quantified the percentage of women and men as contributing authors and as first authors, articles that included at least one woman or man as an author, articles that included at least one woman and one man as authors, and total number of single-authored articles by gender. We identified 963 listed authors across 455 articles. Across all years and authorship position, women and men accounted 36% and 63% authorship, respectively. Authorship for women was lower across all variables assessed; however, there were increased trends across time for all but single-authored articles. We compared these data to those from other behavior-analytic journals.

Women in Behavior Analysis: A Review of the Literature.

Women have played, and continue to play, an important role in behavior analysis. Their participation as authors of journal articles and as journal editors was first quantified in 1983 and has been the topic of several subsequent articles. Other articles have addressed other aspects of women's participation in the discipline, but no review of articles concerned with women in behavior analysis has appeared. The present review (a) describes articles that quantified the participation of women, (b) presents a novel data set providing an updated overview of women's participation in eight behavior-analytic journals, (c) reviews suggestions from prominent female behavior analysts, (d) discusses other topics that pertain to the participation of women, (e) presents data describing the gender of authors who have written about women in behavior analysis, and (f) makes suggestions for future research. Women's participation in behavior analysis has increased greatly over the past half-century. The articles we review clearly document that increase and may have contributed to it, although that contribution is speculative.

Acceptance: A Research Overview and Application of This Core ACT Process in ABA.

Acceptance describes mediating behaviors in which an individual reduces escape and avoidance behaviors in response to unwanted private events while also encouraging increased appetitive control. Given the recent resurgence of interest in acceptance and commitment therapy/training (ACT) in applied behavior analysis (ABA), a review of this core treatment process is warranted. Acceptance has strong empirical support within the psychological and contextual behavioral science literatures, with treatment outcome studies, self-report measures research, and behavioral laboratory tasks all supporting the process. A review of select publications in behavior-analytic journals found that acceptance also has preliminary evidence of effectiveness across a variety of populations and problem behaviors in ABA. An application of acceptance in an ABA context is discussed, and recommendations for a more functional approach to acceptance and other ACT processes are offered. Acceptance interventions fall within the scope of practice of ABA in several contexts and are of relevance to mainstream ABA practitioners.

Equating and Assigning Targets in the Adapted Alternating Treatments Design: Review of Special Education Journals

The current review examined the prevalence of the adapted alternating treatments design (AATD) across 22 special education journals and methods to equate and assign target sets to experimental conditions in the AATD. Since the seminal description of the design in 1985, a total of 49 articles were published using the AATD across 12 of the reviewed journals. The most prominent methods of equating target sets differed from prior reviews of behavior-analytic journals, likely due to the preponderance of response chains being targeted in special education research using the AATD. The majority of articles describe at least one method for equating target sets, although multiple methods were common. Additional methodological strengths in this literature included methods to reduce potential bias when assigning target sets to experimental conditions and counterbalancing target sets across participants. Considerations for practitioners and researchers when using the AATD are described.

Practical Considerations for Researchers at Teaching-Focused Colleges.

Growth in the discipline of behavior analysis depends on research production in basic, translational, and applied areas from a variety of perspectives and research groups. Although doctoral programs in behavior analysis prepare students to become productive researchers, leading behavior-analytic journals tend to publish articles from a more circumscribed set of researchers than might be expected given the recent growth in the field. One reason may be that as new researchers graduate from their training programs, they take positions in very different environments from those of their training, such as teaching-focused colleges or clinical settings. Establishing and maintaining research production in these settings may be challenging due to practical concerns that could be alleviated by recommendations from researchers with experience in those settings. In this article, we identify some of the research challenges faced by early-career behavior analysts working at small teaching-focused colleges and offer practical advice for new researchers in those settings based on our experience. Additionally, we hope this article serves as a catalyst for established researchers working in a variety of settings to share their experiences and wisdom with new researchers in the field.

Authorship trends in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis: An update.

The Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (JABA) is considered the flagship journal for the discipline of applied behavior analysis. Thus, popular research topics and other publication trends within JABA reflect the current cultural and scientific contingencies governing the field of behavior analysis. Researchers have previously quantified a number of authorship trends in JABA (and other behavior-analytic journals) across a number of variables, such as gender identity and sex of author, country of origin, or seniority within the field (Dunlap et al., 1998) to examine demographic and organizational factors associated with successful publication in JABA. These analyses ought to be conducted continuously to monitor trends and detect any potential biases (e.g., sexism). Accordingly, the purpose of the present investigation was to replicate previous research in this area (e.g., Dymond et al., 2000) and provide an update of current publication trends within JABA. Implications for future research and publishing practices are discussed.

Derived Relational Responding and Transformations of Function in Children: A Review of Applied Behavior-Analytic Journals.

Theoretical extensions of Skinner's verbal behavior that emphasize derived relational responding (stimulus equivalence, relational frame theory, and bidirectional naming) can improve the complexity and scope of applied behavior-analytic training models with children. We evaluated the prevalence and content of empirical research on derived relational responding in children within 8 major applied behavior-analytic journals. We identified 123 empirical articles that met all inclusion criteria (i.e., they demonstrated derived relational responding in children). Whereas prior citation analyses have shown higher rates of research with adult participants, considerable research within these journals has involved child participants. In addition, 55% of the research targeted socially relevant or culturally established verbal relations, rather than culturally arbitrary relations (e.g., unknown symbols, consonant-vowel-consonant combinations) that are unlikely to affect real-world behavior. Generalization and transformation tests were also present in 47% of articles. We also conducted a content analysis of all articles that contained culturally relevant relations and demonstrated generalization or transformation of stimulus function (21% of all articles, N = 26); we argue that studies that meet these criteria are likely to be the most immediately impactful for learners. Results suggest that future research is needed to evaluate relational frames other than coordination (e.g., distinction, opposition), as well as to extend considerably the complexity of target relational classes and transformations of stimulus function with children.

Review of Methods to Equate Target Sets in the Adapted Alternating Treatments Design.

The adapted alternating treatments design is a commonly used experimental design in skill acquisition research. This design allows for the evaluation of two or more independent variables on responding to unique target sets. Equating target sets is necessary to ensure a valid comparison of the independent variables. To date, there is little guidance on best practice when equating target sets and it is unclear how researchers have done so previously. We reviewed the reported methods used to equate target sets in articles published using the adapted alternating treatments design in five behavior-analytic journals. Just over half of the studies published using the adapted alternating treatments design reported any method to equate target sets and the methods varied considerably. Alternative methods, such as random assignment, were prevalent. Considerations for best practice and avenues for future research are discussed.