Association for Behavior Analysis International

The Association for Behavior Analysis International® (ABAI) is a nonprofit membership organization with the mission to contribute to the well-being of society by developing, enhancing, and supporting the growth and vitality of the science of behavior analysis through research, education, and practice.


49th Annual Convention; Denver, CO; 2023

Event Details

Previous Page


Poster Session #206J
PCH Sunday Poster Session
Sunday, May 28, 2023
1:00 PM–3:00 PM
Convention Center, Exhibit Hall F
Chair: Camilo Hurtado-Parrado (Southern Illinois University)

Social Validity Trends in Applied Behavior Analysis Journals: An Update

Area: PCH; Domain: Theory
QICHAO PAN (University of Minnesota), Amber Reilly (University of Minnesota, Twin Cities), Moon Young Savana Bak (University of Minnesota, Twin Cities)
Discussant: Melisa Santacroce

Social validity is the heart of applied behavior analysis and is used to validate behavioral interventions. Previous studies investigated the social validity measures in manuscripts published in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (JABA) from 1968 to 2016. However, an up-to-date comprehensive analysis is needed to examine an update on trends in social validity measures after 2016 and to understand how the field has been advancing towards socially valid interventions. The current review assessed social validity measures reported in JABA and Behavior Analysis in Practice (BAP) between 2017 and 2022. JABA is a primarily applied research journal while BAP broadly disseminates research to front-line practitioners of behavior analysis. Four aspects were coded for all empirical articles that included at least one participant – type, dimension, target population, and time of social validity measurement. The results showed that 29% of articles reported social validity. Of manuscripts that included social validity assessment, rating scales were the most widely used type of measurement, and more than two-thirds of the studies collected social validity data after the intervention. Outcome and procedure were the most commonly reported dimensions of social validity. Implications and future directions are also discussed.

145. Funding Trends in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (1968–2021)
Area: PCH; Domain: Theory
LIAM MCCABE (Rutgers University Children's Specialized Hospital-Rutgers University Center for Autism Research, Education, and Services), Nizar Bekai (Rutgers University Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology), Daniel R. Mitteer (Rutgers University (RUCARES)), Brian D. Greer (Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School), Gabrielle Pignatelli (Rutgers University, GSAPP)
Discussant: Camilo Hurtado-Parrado (Southern Illinois University)
Abstract: Previous research has demonstrated that funding (e.g., a federal grant) is correlated with a myriad of benefits including probability of publication, higher citation rates, and increased probability of promotion. To date, no study has examined the prevalence of funded articles and associated outcomes in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (JABA). We examined every JABA publication from 1968 to 2021 to determine whether funding was disclosed and, if so, the funding source and article type. To examine the trends of articles cited by funding type, we extracted citations for both funded and unfunded articles. The total number of funded articles per volume has remained stable over time despite the number of JABA articles per volume increasing. Most funded articles were research articles and involved funding from a federal government. Overall, funded articles were cited more often than unfunded articles. We discuss implications and future directions regarding funding in JABA and the field of behavior analysis.
146. The Operant-Respondent Framework: Implications of an Integrative Approach
Area: PCH; Domain: Theory
THEO FUENTES (University of Nevada, Reno), Sadie Lynn Klassen (Student), Matthew Lewon (University of Nevada, Reno)
Discussant: Melisa Santacroce
Abstract: Due to the influence of B. F. Skinner, the research and analytic focus within behavior analysis has been more on operant conditioning than respondent conditioning, especially in the applied domain. Historically, the distinction between operant and respondent conditioning seems influenced by the idea that they are fundamentally different phenomena, instead of just different procedures that involve common associative principles. However, some have proposed viewing the outcomes of both types of conditioning procedures in common terms of substitution of stimulus functions, and that they should therefore not be seen as distinct phenomena (Delgado and Hayes, 2014). Others have suggested that respondent conditioning plays a fundamental role in the development of stimulus equivalence, though this and other forms of relational responding are often attributed to operant learning (Rehfeldt and Hayes, 1998; Tonneau, 2001). The aim of this poster is to consider the implications of different approaches to conceptualizing the relationship between operant and respondent conditioning and suggest that recognizing their common features and concurrent operation may prove beneficial in both conceptual and applied work. Additionally, we will highlight the relevance of respondent conditioning to applied issues and make suggestions regarding the training of behavior analysts in this domain.



Back to Top
Modifed by Eddie Soh