Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Evolution of Behavior Analysis: Toward a Replication Crisis?

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Perspectives on Behavior Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Open Science Collaboration (Science, 349(6251), 1–8, 2015) produced a massive failure to replicate previous research in psychology—what has been called a “replication crisis in psychology.” An important question for behavior scientists is: To what extent is behavior science vulnerable to this type of massive replication failure? That question is addressed by considering the features of a traditional approach to behavior science. Behavior science in its infancy was a natural science, inductive, within-subject approach that encouraged both direct and systematic replication. Each of these features of behavior science increased its resistance to three factors identified as responsible for the alleged replication crisis: (1) failures to replicate procedures, (2) low-power designs, and (3) publication bias toward positive results. As behavior science has evolved, the features of the traditional approach have become less ubiquitous. And if the science continues to evolve as it has, it will likely become more vulnerable to a massive replication failure like that reported by the Open Science Collaboration (Science, 349(6251), 1–8, 2015).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., & Risley, T. R. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 91–97.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker, M., & Wicherts, J. M. (2011). The (mis)reporting of statistical results in psychology journals. Behavior Research Methods, 43(3), 666–678.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bijou, S. W. (1958). Operant extinction after fixed-interval schedules with young children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1, 25–29.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Branch, M. N. (2019). The “Reproducibility Crisis:” Might the methods used frequently in behavior-analysis research help? Perspectives on Behavior Science, 42(1), 77–89.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Broad, W. J. (1981). The publishing game: Getting more for less. Science, 211(4487), 1137–1139.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Button, K. S., Ioannidis, J. P., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S., & Munafò, M. R. (2013). Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14(5), 365–376.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dallery, J., & Locey, M. L. (2005). Effects of acute and chronic nicotine on impulsive choice in rats. Behavioural Pharmacology, 16, 15–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • De Rond, M., & Miller, A. N. (2005). Publish or perish: Bane or boon of academic life? Journal of Management Inquiry, 14(4), 321–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeVries, J. E., Burnette, M. M., & Redmon, W. K. (1991). Aids prevention: Improving nurses' compliance with glove wearing through performance feedback. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24(4), 705–711.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Dews, P. B. (1958). Effects of chlorpromazine and promazine on performance on a mixed schedule of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1, 73–82.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Dworkin, B. R., & Miller, N. E. (1986). Failure to replicate visceral learning in the acute curarized rat preparation. Behavioral Neuroscience, 100(3), 299.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Elliffe, D., Davison, M., & Landon, J. (2008). Relative reinforcer rates and magnitudes do not control concurrent choice independently. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 90(2), 169–185.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ferster, C. B., & Skinner, B. F. (1957). Schedules of reinforcement. New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fields, L., & Moss, P. (2008). Formation of partially and fully elaborated generalized equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 90(2), 135–168.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, D. T., King, G., Pettigrew, S., & Wilson, T. D. (2016). Comment on “Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science.”. Science, 351(6277), 1037.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, S. N., Fanelli, D., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2016). What does research reproducibility mean? Science Translational Medicine, 8(341), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hales, A. H., Wesselmann, E. D., & Hilgard, J. (2019). Improving psychological science through transparency and openness: An overview. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 42(1), 13–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hantula, D. A. (2019). Replication and reliability in behavior science and behavior analysis: A call for a conversation. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 42(1), 1–11.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • John, L. K., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2012). Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychological Science, 23(5), 524–532.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, F. S. (1958). The phantom plateau. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1, 1–13.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Killeen, P. R. (2019). Predict, control, and replicate to understand: How statistics can foster the fundamental goals of science. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 42(1), 109–132.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kühberger, A., Fritz, A., & Scherndl, T. (2014). Publication bias in psychology: A diagnosis based on the correlation between effect size and sample size. PloS One, 9(9), 1–8.

  • Laraway, S., Snycerski, S., Pradhan, S., & Huitema, B. E. (2019). An overview of scientific reproducibility: Consideration of relevant issues for behavior science/analysis. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 42(1), 33–57.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ledoux, S. F. (2002). Defining natural sciences. Behaviorology Today, 5(1), 34–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lilienfeld, S. O. (2017). Psychology’s replication crisis and the grant culture: Righting the ship. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(4), 660–664.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Locey, M. L., & Dallery, J. (2009). Isolating behavioral mechanisms of intertemporal choice: Nicotine effect on delay discounting and amount sensitivity. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 91(2), 213–223.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Locey, M. L., Pietras, C. J., & Hackenberg, T. D. (2009). Human risky choice: Delay sensitivity depends on reinforcer type. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 35(1), 15.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, S. E., Lau, M. Y., & Howard, G. S. (2015). Is psychology suffering from a replication crisis? What does “failure to replicate” really mean? American Psychologist, 70, 487–498.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mazur, J. E. (1987). An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement. In M. L. Commons, J. E. Mazur, J. A. Nevin, & H. Rachlin (Eds.), Quantitative analyses of behavior: The effects of delay and of intervening events on reinforcement value (pp. 55–73). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, D. L., & Morgan, R. K. (2001). Single-participant research design: Bringing science to managed care. American Psychologist, 56(2), 119.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Odum, A. L., & Baumann, A. A. (2010). Delay discounting: State and trait variable. In G. J. Madden & W. K. Bickel (Eds.), Impulsivity: The behavioral and neurological science of discounting (pp. 39–65). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perone, M. (2019). How I learned to stop worrying and love replication failures. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 42(1), 91–108.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Refinetti, R. (1990). In defense of the least publishable unit. Journal of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, 4(1), 128–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research. New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, B. F. (1950). Are theories of learning necessary? Psychological Review, 57(4), 193–216.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smaldino, P. E., & McElreath, R. (2016). The natural selection of bad science. Royal Society Open Science, 3(9), 160384.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, G. D., & Ebrahim, S. (2002). Data dredging, bias, or confounding: They can all get you into the BMJ and the Friday papers. British Medical Journal, 325(7378), 1437.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tincani, M., & Travers, J. (2019). Replication research, publication bias, and applied behavior analysis. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 42(1), 59–75.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, M. T., & Branch, M. N. (2008). Tolerance to effects of cocaine on behavior under a response-initiated fixed-interval schedule. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 90(2), 207–218.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Youn, T. I., & Price, T. M. (2009). Learning from the experience of others: The evolution of faculty tenure and promotion rules in comprehensive institutions. Journal of Higher Education, 80(2), 204–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, M. E. (2019). Bayesian data analysis as a tool for behavior analysts. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 111(2), 225–238.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann, Z. J., Watkins, E. E., & Poling, A. (2015). JEAB research over time: species used, experimental designs, statistical analyses, and sex of subjects. The Behavior Analyst, 38(2), 203–218.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno, 1664 North Virginia Street, Reno, NV, 89557, USA

    Matthew L. Locey

Authors
  1. Matthew L. Locey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew L. Locey.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Locey, M.L. The Evolution of Behavior Analysis: Toward a Replication Crisis?. Perspect Behav Sci 43, 655–675 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-020-00264-w

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-020-00264-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation