Advertisement

Perspectives on Behavior Science

, Volume 41, Issue 1, pp 241–267 | Cite as

Why We Are Still Not Acting to Save the World: the Upward Challenge of a Post-Skinnerian Behavior Science

  • Mark R. Dixon
  • Jordan Belisle
  • Ruth Anne Rehfeldt
  • William B. Root
Article

Abstract

Basic research on derived stimulus relations reveals many effects that may be useful in understanding and resolving significant and complex societal problems. Applied research on derived stimulus relations has done little to fulfill this promise, focusing instead mainly on simple demonstrations of well-known phenomena. We trace the research tradition of derived stimulus relations from laboratory to wide-scale implementation, and put forward several suggestions for how to progress effective and impactful research on derived relational responding to issues of immense social importance. To advance a science of behavior from relative social obscurity to the developing world-saving technologies, we must evaluate our own behavior as scientists in the grander social context.

Keywords

Stimulus relations Relational frame theory Verbal behavior Social behavior 

References

  1. Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P., Cruikshank, K., Mayer, R., Pintrich, P., et al. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy. New York, NY: Longman Publishing.Google Scholar
  2. Arch, J. J., Eifert, G. H., Davies, C., Vilardaga, J. C. P., Rose, R. D., & Craske, M. G. (2012). Randomized clinical trial of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) versus acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for mixed anxiety disorders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 80(5), 750–765.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028310.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Arntzen, E., & Steingrimsdottir, H. (2017). Equivalence class formation in older adults with electroencephalography (EEG) as an additional measure. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11, 1–10.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00058.Google Scholar
  4. Azrin, N. H. (1959). A technique for delivering shock to pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 2, 161–163.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1959.2-161.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnes, A. C., & Harlacher, J. E. (2008). Clearing the confusion: response-to-intervention as a set of principles. Education and Treatment of Children, 31, 417–431.  https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.0.0000.Google Scholar
  6. Barnes, D., & Holmes, Y. (1991). Radical behaviorism, stimulus equivalence, and human cognition. The Psychological Record, 41, 19–31.Google Scholar
  7. Barnes-Holmes, D., & Barnes-Holmes, Y. (2000). Explaining complex behavior: two perspectives on the concept of generalized operant classes. The Psychological Record, 50, 251–265.Google Scholar
  8. Barnes-Holmes, Y., Hussey, I., McEnteggart, C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Foody, M. (2016). The relationship between relational frame theory and middle-level terms in acceptance and commitment therapy. In R. D. Zettle, S. C. Hayes, & A. Biglan (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of contextual behavioral science. Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Google Scholar
  9. Barnes-Holmes, D., Murphy, A., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Stewart, I. (2010). The implicit relational assessment procedure: exploring the impact of private versus public contexts and the response latency criterion on pro-white and anti-black stereotyping among white Irish individuals. The Psychological Record, 60(1), 57–79.Google Scholar
  10. Barrish, H. H., Saunders, M., & Wolf, M. M. (1969). Good behavior game: effects of individual contingencies for group consequences on disruptive behavior in a classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2, 119–124.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1969.2-119.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Behavior Analysis Certification Board (2016). Behavior analysis certification board: fourth edition task list. Retrieved from http://bacb.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/160101-BCBA-BCaBA-task-list-fourth-edition-english.pdf
  12. Belisle, J., Paliliunas, D., Dixon, M. R., & Speelman, R. C. (in press). Decreasing influence of arbitrarily applicable verbal relations of recreational gamblers: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. Google Scholar
  13. Boyce. (2011). The mindfulness revolution: leading psychologists, teachers, artists and meditation teacher son the power of mindfulness in everyday life. Boulder, CO: Shambhala.Google Scholar
  14. Bradshaw, C. P., Koth, C. W., Bevans, K. B., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P. J. (2008). The impact of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) on the organizational health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23, 462–473.Google Scholar
  15. Brodsky, J., & Fienup, D.M. (in press). Sidman goes to college: a meta-analysis of equivalence-based education in college instruction. Perspectives on Behavior Science. Google Scholar
  16. Butler, A. C., Chapman, J. E., Forman, E. M., & Beck, A. T. (2006). The empirical status of cognitive-behavioral therapy: a review of meta-analyses. Clinical Psychology Review, 26, 17–31.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2005.07.003.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Byrne, T., & Poling, A. (2017). Behavioral effects of delayed timeouts from reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 107, 208–217.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.246.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Carr, E. G., Dunlap, G., Horner, R. H., Koegel, R. L., Turnbull, A. P., Sailor, W., Anderson, J. L., Albin, R. W., Koegel, L. K., & Fox, L. (2002). Positive behavior support: evolution of an applied science. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 4, 4–16.Google Scholar
  19. Catania, A.C. (2013). Learning (5th ed.). Cornwall-on-Hudson, NY: Sloan.Google Scholar
  20. Catania, A. C., Matthews, B. A., & Shimoff, E. (1982). Instructed versus shaped human verbal behavior: interactions with nonverbal responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 38, 233–248.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1982.38-233.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Catania, A. C., Shimoff, E., & Matthews, B. A. (1989). In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: cognition, contingencies, and instructional control (pp. 119–150). Reno, NV: Context Press.Google Scholar
  22. Childs, K. E., Kincaid, D., George, H. P., & Gage, N. A. (2016). The relationship between school-wide implementation of positive behavior intervention and supports and student discipline outcomes. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18, 89–99.Google Scholar
  23. Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). London: Pearson.Google Scholar
  24. Critchfield, T. S. (2011). Translational contributions of the experimental analysis of behavior. The Behavior Analyst, 34, 3–17.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Critchfield, T. S., Becirevic, A., & Reed, D. D. (2016). On the social validity of behavior-analytic communication: a call for research and description of one method. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 33, 1–23.Google Scholar
  26. Critchfield, T. S., Doepke, K. J., Epting, L. K., Becirevic, A., Reed, D. D., Fienup, D. M., et al. (2017). Normative emotional responses to behavior analysis jargon or how not to use words to win friends and influence people. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10, 97–106.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Critchfield, T. S., & Reed, D. D. (2017). The fuzzy concept of applied behavior analysis research. The Behavior Analyst, 40, 123–159.Google Scholar
  28. Critchfield, T. S., & Twyman, J. T. (2014). Prospective instructional design: establishing conditions for emergent learning. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 13, 201–217.Google Scholar
  29. Debert, P., Matos, M. A., & McIlvane, W. (2007). Conditional relations with compound abstract stimuli using a go/no-go procedure. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 87, 89–96.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2007.46-05.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. DeGrandpre, R. J., Bickel, W. K., & Higgins, S. T. (1992). Emergent equivalence relations between interoceptive (drug) and exteroceptive (visual) stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 58, 9–18.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Dixon, M. R. (2000). Manipulating the illusion of control: variations in gambling as a function of perceived control over chance outcomes. The Psychological Record, 50, 705–719.Google Scholar
  32. Dixon, M. R. (2014a). The PEAK relational training system: direct training module. Carbondale, IL: Shawnee Scientific Press.Google Scholar
  33. Dixon, M. R. (2014b). The PEAK relational training system: generalization module. Carbondale, IL: Shawnee Scientific Press.Google Scholar
  34. Dixon, M. R. (2015). The PEAK relational training system: equivalence module. Carbondale, IL: Shawnee Scientific Press.Google Scholar
  35. Dixon, M. R. (2016). The PEAK relational training system: transformation module. Carbondale, IL: Shawnee Scientific Press.Google Scholar
  36. Dixon, M. R., Belisle, J., Blevins, A., & Hayes, S. C. (under review). Derived relational responding is a generalized operant: evidence from children with autism using the PEAK-E curriculum.Google Scholar
  37. Dixon, M. R., Belisle, J., McKeel, A., Whiting, S., Speelman, R. C., Daar, J. H., & Rowsey, K. E. (2017). An internal and critical review of the PEAK relational training system for children with autism and related intellectual disabilities: 2014–2017. The Behavior Analyst. Google Scholar
  38. Dixon, M. R., Belisle, J., Stanley, C. R., Rowsey, K. E., & Daar, S. (2015). Toward a behavior analysis of complex language for children with autism: evaluating the relationship between PEAK and the VB-MAPP. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 27, 223–233.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-014-9410-4.Google Scholar
  39. Dixon, M. R., Branon, A., Nastally, B. L., & Mui, N. (2009). Examining prejudice towards Middle Eastern persons via a transformation of stimulus functions. The Behavior Analyst Today, 10, 295–318.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0100672.Google Scholar
  40. Dixon, M. R., Dymond, S., Rehfeldt, R. A., Roche, B., & Zlomke, K. R. (2003). Terrorism and relational frame theory. Behavior and Social Issues, 12, 129–147.Google Scholar
  41. Dixon, M. R., & Lemke, M. (2007). Reducing prejudice towards Middle Eastern persons as terrorists. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 8, 5–12.Google Scholar
  42. Dixon, M. R., Rehfeldt, R. A., Zlomke, K. R., & Robinson, A. (2006). Exploring the development and dismantling of equivalence classes involving terrorist stimuli. The Psychological Record, 56, 83–103.Google Scholar
  43. Dixon, M. R., Stanley, C., Belisle, J., & Rowsey, K. E. (2016). The test-retest and interrater reliability of the Promoting the Emergence of Advanced Knowledge-Direct Training assessment for use with individuals with autism and related disabilities. Behavior Analysis: Research and Practice, 16, 34–40.  https://doi.org/10.1037/bar0000027.Google Scholar
  44. Dixon, M. R., Small, S. L., & Rosales, R. (2007). Extended analysis of empirical citations with Skinner’s Verbal Behavior: 1984–2004. The Behavior Analyst, 30, 197–209.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Dixon, M. R., Zlomke, K. M., & Rehfeldt, R. A. (2006). Restoring Americans’ nonequivalent frames of terror: an application of relational frame theory. The Behavior Analyst Today, 7, 275–289.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0100153.Google Scholar
  46. Dougher, M. J., Augustson, E., Markham, M. R., Greenway, D. E., & Wulfert, E. (1994). The transfer of respondent eliciting and extinction functions through stimulus equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 62, 331–351.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1994.62-331.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. Dougher, M. J., Hamilton, D. A., Fink, B. C., & Harrington, J. (2007). Transformation of the discriminative and eliciting functions of generalized relational stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 88, 179–197.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2007.45-05.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. Drolet, B. C., & Lorenzi, N. M. (2011). Translational research: understanding the continuum from bench to bedside. Translational Research, 157, 1–5.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trsl.2010.10.002.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Dymond, S., & Barnes, D. (1995). A transformation of self-discrimination response functions in accordance with the arbitrarily applicable relations of sameness, more than, and less than. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 64, 163–184.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1995.64-163.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. Dymond, S., O’Hora, D., Whelan, R., & O’Donovan, A. (2006). Citation analysis of Skinner’s Verbal Behavior: 1984–2004. The Behavior Analyst, 29, 75–88.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. Dymond, S., & Rehfeldt, R. A. (2000). Understanding complex behavior: the transformation of stimulus functions. The Behavior Analyst, 23, –239, 254.Google Scholar
  52. Dymond, S., Roche, B., Forsyth, J. P., Whelan, R., & Rhoden, J. (2007). Transformation of avoidance response functions in accordance with same and opposite relational frames. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 88, 249–262.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2007.22-07.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. Embry, D. D. (2002). The good behavior game: a best practice candidate as a universal behavioral vaccine. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 5, 273–297.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020977107086.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Faux, S. F. (2002). Cognitive neuroscience from a behavioral perspective: a critique of chasing ghosts with Geiger counters. The Behavior Analyst, 25, 161–173.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. Fields, L., Adams, B. J., Verhave, T., & Newman, S. (1990). The effects of nodality on the formation of equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 53, 345–358.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1990.53-345.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. Fienup, D. M., & Critchfield, T. S. (2011). Transportability of equivalence-based programmed instruction: efficacy and efficiency in a college classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44, 435–450.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2011.44-435.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. Fienup, D. M., Hamelin, D. P., Reyes-Giordano, K., & Falcomata, T. S. (2011). College-level instruction: derived relations and programmed instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44, 413–416.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  58. Fienup, D. M., Mylan, S. E., Brodsky, J., & Pytte, C. (2016). From the laboratory to the classroom: the effects of equivalence-based instruction on neuroanatomy competencies. Journal of Behavioral Education, 25, 143–165.Google Scholar
  59. Fixsen, D.L., & Blase, K.A (in press). The teaching-family model: the first 50 years. Perspectives on Behavior Science. Google Scholar
  60. Fixsen, D. L., & Blase, K. A. (1993). Creating new realities: program development and dissemination. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 597–615.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  61. Flay, B. R., Biglan, A., Boruch, R. F., Castro, F. G., Gottfredson, D., Kellam, S., et al. (2005). Standards of evidence: criteria for efficacy, effectiveness and dissemination. Prevention Science, 6, 151–175.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Forman, E. M., Herbert, J. D., Moitra, E., Yeomans, P. D., & Geller, P. A. (2007). A randomized controlled effectiveness trial of acceptance and commitment therapy and cognitive therapy for anxiety and depression. Behavior Modification, 31, 772–799.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Foxall, G. R. (2016). Consumer choice as behavior. In G. R. Foxall (Ed.), Perspectives on consumer choice. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  64. Friedman, S. L. (2003). Liver fibrosis—from bench to bedside. Journal of Hepatology, 38, 38–53.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-8278(02)00429-4.Google Scholar
  65. Gomez, A. (2017, January 28). Experts question legality of Trump’s immigration ban on Muslim countries. USA Today. Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/ 2017/01/28/experts-question-legality-trumps-ban-muslim-countries/97189982/.
  66. Gottfredson, D. C., Cook, T. D., Gardner, F. E., Gorman-Smith, D., Howe, G. W., Sandler, I. N., & Zafft, K. M. (2015). Standards of evidence for efficacy, effectiveness, and scale-up research in prevention science: next generation. Prevention Science, 16, 893–926.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. Gresham, F. M., Gansle, K. A., & Noell, G. H. (1993). Treatment integrity in applied behavior analysis with children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 257–263.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1993.26-257.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. Guinther, P. M., & Dougher, M. J. (2010). Semantic false memories in the form of derived relational intrusions following training. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 93, 329–347.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2010.93-329.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  69. Guinther, P. M., & Dougher, M. J. (2015). The clinical relevance of stimulus equivalence and relational frame theory in influencing the behavior of verbally competent adults. Current Opinion in Psychology, 2, 21–25.Google Scholar
  70. Hacker, T., Stone, P., & MacBeth, A. (2016). Acceptance and commitment therapy—do we know enough? Cumulative and sequential meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Affective Disorders, 190, 551–565.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Hagopian, A., Flaxman, A. D., Takaro, T. K., Al Shatari, S. A. E., Rajaratnam, J., Becker, S., et al. (2013). Mortality in Iraq associated with the 2003–2011 war and occupation: findings from a national cluster sample survey by the university collaborative Iraq Mortality Study. PLoS Medicine, 10, e1001533.Google Scholar
  72. Haimson, B., Wilkinson, K. M., Rosenquist, C., Ouimet, C., & McIlvane, W. J. (2009). Electrophysiological correlates of stimulus equivalence processes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 92, 245–256.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2009.92-245.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  73. Hantula, D. A., Brockman, D. D., & Smith, C. L. (2008). Online shopping as foraging: the effects of increasing delays on purchasing and patch residence. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 51, 147–154.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2008.2000340.Google Scholar
  74. Hantula, D. A., & Crowell, C. R. (2016). Matching and behavioral contrast in a two-option repeated investment simulation. Managerial and Decision Economics, 37, 294–305.  https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.2717.Google Scholar
  75. Hayes, S. C. (Ed.). (1989). Rule-governed behavior: cognition, contingencies, and instructional control. Reno, NV: Context Press.Google Scholar
  76. Hayes, S. C. (2004). Acceptance and commitment therapy, relational frame theory, and the third wave of behavioral and cognitive therapies. Behavior Therapy, 35, 639–665.Google Scholar
  77. Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). Relational frame theory: a post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
  78. Hayes, S. C., Brownstein, A. J., Zettle, R. D., Rosenfarb, I., & Korn, Z. (1986). Rule-governed behavior and sensitivity to changing consequences of responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 45, 237–256.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1986.45-237.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  79. Hayes, S. C., Rosenfarb, I., Wulfert, E., Munt, E. D., Korn, Z., & Zettle, R. D. (1985). Self-reinforcement effects: an artifact of social standard setting? Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 201–214.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1985.18-201.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  80. Hayes, S. C., & Sanford, B. T. (2014). Cooperation came first: Evolution and human cognition. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 101, 112–129.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.64.
  81. Hayes, s.c., & smith. (2005). Get of your mind and into your life: The new acceptance and commitment therapy. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.Google Scholar
  82. Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K., & Wilson, K. G. (1999). Acceptance and commitment therapy: an experiential approach to behavior change. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  83. Hayes, L. J., Tilley, K. J., & Hayes, S. C. (1988). Extending equivalence class membership to gustatory stimuli. The Psychological Record, 38, 473–482.Google Scholar
  84. Hayes, S. C., Zettle, R. D., & Rosenfarb, I. (1989). Rule-following. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: cognition, contingencies, and instructional control (pp. 191–220). Reno, NV: Context Press.Google Scholar
  85. Healy, O., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Smeets, P. M. (2000). Derived relational responding as generalized operant behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74, 207–227.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2000.74-207.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  86. Hooper, N., Erdogan, A., Keen, G., Lawton, K., & McHugh, L. (2015). Perspective taking reduces the fundamental attribution error. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 4, 69–72.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2015.02.002.Google Scholar
  87. Hoover, J. J., & Patton, J. R. (2008). The role of special educators in a multitiered instructional system. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43, 195–202.Google Scholar
  88. Hörig, H., Marincola, E., & Marincola, F. M. (2005). Obstacles and opportunities in translational research. Nature Medicine, 11, 705–708.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nm0705-705.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. Homer, R. H., Sugai, G., Todd, A. W., & Lewis-Palmer, T. (2005). School-wide positive behavior support. In L. Bambara & L. Kern (Eds.), Individualized supports for students with problem behaviors: designing positive behavior plans (pp. 359–390). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  90. Keintz, K. S., Miguel, C. F., Kao, B., & Finn, H. E. (2011). Using conditional discrimination training to produce emergent relations between coins and their values in children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44, 909–913.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2011.44-909.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  91. Kellam, S. G., & Anthony, J. C. (1998). Targeting early antecedents to prevent tobacco smoking: findings from an epidemiologically based randomized field trial. American Journal of Public Health, 88, 1490–1495.Google Scholar
  92. Kellam, S. G., Wang, W., Mackenzie, A. C., Brown, C. H., Ompad, D. C., ... & Windham, A. (2014). The impact of the Good Behavior Game, a universal classroom-based preventive intervention in first and second grades, on high-risk sexual behaviors and drug abuse and dependence disorders into young adulthood. Prevention Science, 15, 6–18.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-012-0296-z.
  93. Khandker, S. R., Koolwal, G. B., & Samad, H. A. (2010). Handbook on impact evaluation: quantitative methods and practices. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  94. Kyonka, E.G.E. & Subramaniam, S. (in press). Translating behavior analysis: a spectrum rather than a roadmap. Perspectives on Behavior Science. Google Scholar
  95. Lane, S. D., Clow, J. K., Innis, A., & Critchfield, T. S. (1998). Generalization of cross-modal stimulus equivalence classes: operant processes as components in human category formation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 70, 267–279.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1998.70-267.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  96. LeBlanc, L. A., Miguel, C. F., Cummings, A. R., Goldsmith, T. R., & Carr, J. E. (2003). The effects of three stimulus-equivalence testing conditions on emergent US geography relations of children diagnosed with autism. Behavioral Interventions, 18, 279–289.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.144.Google Scholar
  97. Lich, K. H., Ginexi, E. M., Osgood, N. D., & Mabry, P. L. (2013). A call to address complexity in prevention science research. Prevention Science, 14, 279–289.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-012.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. Lillis, J., Hayes, S. C., Bunting, K., & Masuda, A. (2009). Teaching acceptance and mindfulness to improve the lives of the obese: a preliminary test of a theoretical model. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 37(1), 58–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Luoma, J. B., Hayes, S. C., & Walser, R. D. (2007). Learning ACT: An acceptance & commitment therapy skills-training manual for therapists. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.Google Scholar
  100. Lynch, D. C., & Cuvo, A. J. (1995). Stimulus equivalence instruction of fraction-decimal relations. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 115–126.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1995.28-115.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  101. Mace, F. C., & Critchfield, T. S. (2010). Translational research in behavior analysis: historical traditions and imperative for the future. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 93, 293–312.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2010.93-293.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  102. Malott, R. W. (1993). A theory of rule-governed behavior and organizational behavior management. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 12, 45–65.Google Scholar
  103. Marchand, E., Stice, E., Rohde, P., & Becker, C. B. (2011). Moving from efficacy to effectiveness trials in prevention research. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 49, 32–41.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2010.10.008.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. Markham, M. R., & Dougher, M. J. (1993). Compound stimuli in emergent stimulus relations: extending the scope of stimulus equivalence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 60, 529–542.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1993.60-529.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  105. Marr, M. J. (2017). The future of behavior analysis: foxes and hedgehogs revisited. The Behavior Analyst, 40, 197–207.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-017-0107-8.Google Scholar
  106. Matthews, B. A., Shimoff, E., Catania, A. C., & Sagvolten, T. (1977). Uninstructed human responding: sensitivity to ratio and interval contingencies. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 27, 453–467.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1977.27-453.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  107. Mayer, G. R., Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Wallace, M. (2013) Behavior analysis for lasting change (3 rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: The Cambridge Center – Sloan Century Series in Behavior Analysis.Google Scholar
  108. McEnteggart, C. (in press). A tutorial on the connection between the study of derived stimulus relations and acceptance and commitment therapy. Perspectives on Behavior Science.Google Scholar
  109. McKeel, A. N., Dixon, M. R., Daar, J. H., Rowsey, K. E., & Szekely, S. (2015). Evaluating the efficacy of the PEAK relational training system using a randomized controlled trial of children with autism. Journal of Behavioral Education, 24, 230–241.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-015-9219-y.
  110. Miguel, C. F., Yang, H. G., Finn, H. E., & Ahearn, W. H. (2009). Establishing derived textual control in activity schedules with children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 703–709.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2009.42-703.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  111. Miller, G. A. (2003). The cognitive revolution: a historical perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 141–144.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00029-9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. Murphy, C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Barnes-Holmes, Y. (2005). Derived manding in children with autism: synthesizing Skinner’s verbal behavior with relational frame theory. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38, 445–462.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2005.97-04.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  113. O’Donohue, W., Ferguson, K. E., & Naugle, A. E. (2003). The structure of the cognitive revolution: an examination from the philosophy of science. The Behavior Analyst, 26, 85–110.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  114. Palmer, D. C. (2004). Data in search of a principle: a review of relational frame theory: a post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 81, 189–204.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2004.81-189.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  115. Pepperberg, I. M. (1981). Functional vocalizations by an African Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Ethology, 55, 139–160.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.1981.tb01265.x.Google Scholar
  116. Poduska, J. M., Kellam, S. G., Wang, W., Brown, C. H., Ialongo, N. S., & Toyinbo, P. (2008). Impact of the good behavior game, a universal classroom-based behavior intervention, on young adult service use for problems with emotions, behavior, or drugs or alcohol. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 95, S29–S44.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2007.10.009.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  117. Powers, M. B., Vörding, M. B. Z. V. S., & Emmelkamp, P. M. (2009). Acceptance and commitment therapy: a meta-analytic review. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 78, 73–80.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000190790.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. Rehfeldt, R. A. (2011). Toward a technology of derived stimulus relations: an analysis of articles published in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1992–2009. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44, 109–119.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2011.44-109.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  119. Rehfeldt, R. A., Jung, H. L., Aguirre, A., Nichols, J. L., & Root, W. B. (2016). Beginning the dialogue on the e-transformation: behavior analysis’ first massive open online course (MOOC). Behavior Analysis in Practice, 9, 3–13.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  120. Rehfeldt, R. A., & Dixon, M. R. (2005). Evaluating the establishment and maintenance of visual-visual and gustatory-visual equivalence relations in adults with developmental disabilities. Behavior Modification, 29, 696–707.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  121. Root, W. B., Rehfeldt, R. A., and Castro, M. (under review). Online equivalence based instruction: revitalizing the teaching machine.Google Scholar
  122. Rosenfarb, I., & Hayes, S. C. (1984). Social standard setting: the Achilles heel of informational accounts of therapeutic change. Behavior Therapy, 15, 515–528.Google Scholar
  123. Ruiz, F. J., & Luciano, C. (2011). Cross-domain analogies as relating derived relations among two separate relational networks. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 95, 369–385.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2011.95-369.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  124. Saunders, R. R., Saunders, K. J., Kirby, K. C., & Spradlin, J. E. (1988). The merger and development of equivalence classes by unreinforced conditional selection of comparison stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 50, 145–162.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1988.50-145.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  125. Saunders, R. R., Wachter, J., & Spradlin, J. E. (1988). Establishing auditory stimulus control over an eight-member equivalence class via conditional discrimination procedures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 49, 95–115.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1988.49-95.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  126. Schlund, M. W., Cataldo, M. F., & Hoehn-Saric, R. (2008). Neural correlates of derived relational responding on tests of stimulus equivalence. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 4, 1–8.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1744-9081-4-6.Google Scholar
  127. Shimoff, E., Catania, A. C., & Matthews, B. A. (1981). Uninstructed human responding: sensitivity of low-rate performance to schedule contingencies. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 36, 207–220.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1981.36-207.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  128. Sidman, M. (1971). Reading and auditory-visual equivalences. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 14, 5–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  129. Sidman, M. (1986). Functional analysis of emergent verbal classes. In T. Thompson & M. D. Zeiler (Eds.), Analysis and integration of behavioral units (pp. 213245). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  130. Sidman, M. (1994). Equivalence relations: a research story. Boston: Authors Cooperative.Google Scholar
  131. Sidman, M., Kirk, B., & Willson-Morris, M. (1985). Six-member stimulus classes generated by conditional discrimination procedures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 43, 21–42.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1985.43-21.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  132. Sidman, M., & Tailby, W. (1982). Conditional discrimination vs. matching to sample: an expansion of the testing paradigm. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 5–22.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1982.37-5.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  133. Sidman, M., Willson-Morris, M., & Kirk, B. (1986). Matching-to-sample procedures and the development of equivalence relations: the role of naming. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 6, 1–19.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0270-4684(86)90003-0.Google Scholar
  134. Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  135. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York, NY: Appleton-Century Crofts.Google Scholar
  136. Skinner, B. F. (1969). Contingencies of reinforcement: a theoretical analysis. New York, NY: Appleton-Century Crofts.Google Scholar
  137. Skinner, B. F. (1977). Why I am not a cognitive psychologist. Behaviorism, 5, 1–10.Google Scholar
  138. Skinner, B. F. (1987). Why we are not acting to save the world. In B. F Skinner (Ed.) Upon further reflection (pp. 1–14). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall PTR.Google Scholar
  139. Slattery, B., Stewart, I., & O'Hora, D. (2011). Testing for transitive class containment as a feature of hierarchical classification. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 96, 243–260.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2011.96-243.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  140. Solomon, B. G., Klein, S. A., Hintze, J. M., Cressey, J. M., & Peller, S. L. (2012). A meta-analysis of school-wide positive behavior support: an exploratory study using single-case synthesis. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 105–121.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20625.Google Scholar
  141. Spencer, T. J., & Chase, P. N. (1996). Speed analyses of stimulus equivalence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 643–659.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1996.65-643.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  142. Sperry, R. W. (1993). The impact and promise of the cognitive revolution. American Psychologist, 48, 878–885.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.48.8.878.Google Scholar
  143. Stewart, I., Barnes-Holmes, D., Roche, B., & Smeets, P. M. (2002). A functional-analytic model of analogy: a relational frame analysis. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 78, 375–396.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2002.78-375.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  144. Sugai, G., & Horner, R. R. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-wide positive behavior support. School Psychology Review, 35, 245–259.Google Scholar
  145. Tashiro, T., & Mortensen, L. (2006). Translational research: how social psychology can improve psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 61, 959–966.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.61.9.959.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  146. Tonneau, F. (2001). Equivalence relations: a critical analysis. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 2, 1–33.Google Scholar
  147. Tonneau, F., & González, C. (2004). Function transfer in human operant experiments: the role of stimulus pairings. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 81, 239–255.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2004.81-239.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  148. Törneke N (2010). Learning RFT. An introduction to relational frame theory and its clinical implications. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.Google Scholar
  149. Vilardaga, R., Hayes, S. C., Levin, M. E., & Muto, T. (2009). Creating a strategy for progress: a contextual behavioral science approach. The Behavior Analyst, 32, 105–133.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  150. Vollmer, T. R. (2011). Three variations of translational research: comments on Critchfield (2011). The Behavior Analyst, 34, 31–35.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  151. Walker, B. D., & Rehfeldt, R. A. (2012). An evaluation of the stimulus equivalence paradigm to teach single-subject design to distance education students via blackboard. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45, 329–344.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-329.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  152. Walser, R. D., & Hayes, S. C. (2006). Acceptance and commitment therapy in the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder. Cognitive-behavioral therapies for trauma, 2, 146–172.Google Scholar
  153. Whelan, R., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2004). The transformation of consequential functions in accordance with the relational frames of same and opposite. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 82, 177–195.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2004.82-177.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  154. White, H. (2009). Theory-based impact evaluation: principles and practice. Journal of Development Effectiveness, 1, 271–284.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19439340903114628.Google Scholar
  155. Zettle, R. D. (1990). Rule-governed behavior: a radical behavioral answer to the cognitive challenge. The Psychological Record, 40, 41–49.Google Scholar
  156. Zettle, R. D., & Hayes, S. C. (1982). Rule-governed behavior: a potential theoretical framework for cognitive-behavioral research and therapy. In P. C. Kendall (Ed.), Advances in cognitive behavioral research and therapy (pp. 73–118). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark R. Dixon
    • 1
  • Jordan Belisle
    • 1
  • Ruth Anne Rehfeldt
    • 1
  • William B. Root
    • 1
  1. 1.Behavior Analysis & TherapySouthern Illinois UniversityCarbondaleUSA

Personalised recommendations