Advertisement

The Behavior Analyst

, Volume 37, Issue 2, pp 83–86 | Cite as

Determining How, When, and Whether You Should Publish Outside the Box: Sober Advice for Early Career Behavior Analysts

  • Derek D. Reed
Original Research

Abstract

Publishing outside of behavior analysis is necessary for the field’s impact in advancing its science or improving its treatments. As consumers of behavior analysis, we typically only see the success stories in outlets such as the Journal for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, and The Behavior Analyst. Lacking from these models is a description of the hard work and occasional missteps that accompany dissemination outside the box. In this paper, I propose that prospective disseminators need to (a) critically evaluate what they have to say, (b) carefully consider the field’s interests, and (c) honestly analyze professional and personal contingencies to determine whether publishing outside the box should be a priority, depending on one’s stage of professional development. I conclude with some general recommendations to early career behavior analysts aspiring to disseminate outside the field.

Keywords

Dissemination Publication Journals Audience control 

References

  1. American Psychological Association. (2012). Summary report of journal operations, 2011. American Psychologist, 67, 410–411. doi: 10.1037/a0028431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dar-Nimrod, I., Rawn, C. D., Lehman, D. R., & Schwartz, B. (2009). The maximization paradox: the costs of seeking alternatives. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 631–635. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2009.01.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Friman, P. C. (2014). Publishing outside the box: attaining mainstream prominence requires demonstration of mainstream relevance. The Behavior Analyst, 37Google Scholar
  4. Hineline, P. N. (1980). The language of behavior analysis. Its community, its functions, and its limitations. Behaviorism, 8, 67–86.Google Scholar
  5. Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: can one desire too muchof a good thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(995), 1006. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.995.Google Scholar
  6. Lindsley, O. R. (1991). From technical jargon to plain English for application. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 449–458. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1991.24-449.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Poling, A. (2010). Looking to the future: will behavior analysis survive and prosper? The Behavior Analyst, 33, 7–17.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Reed, D. D., Kaplan, B. A., & Brewer, A. T. (2012). Discounting the freedom to choose: implications for the paradox of choice. Behavioural Processes, 90, 424–427. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2012.03.017.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Schlinger, H. D. (2014). Publishing outside the box: talking with strangers. The Behavior Analyst, 37.Google Scholar
  10. Schwartz, B. (2004). The paradox of choice. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  11. Skinner, B. F. (1981). How to discover what you have to say—a talk to students. The Behavior Analyst, 4, 1–7.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Smith, R. (2006). Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 99, 178–182.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Vyse, S. (2014). Publishing outside the box: popular press books. The Behavior Analyst, 37Google Scholar
  14. Wolf, M. M. (1978). Social validity: the case for subjective measurement or how applied behavior analysis is finding its heart. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 203–214. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1978.11-203.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied Behavioral Science, 4048 Dole Center for Human DevelopmentUniversity of KansasLawrenceUSA

Personalised recommendations