The Behavior Analyst

, Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 41–56 | Cite as

The Evidence-Based Practice of Applied Behavior Analysis

  • Timothy A. SlocumEmail author
  • Ronnie Detrich
  • Susan M. Wilczynski
  • Trina D. Spencer
  • Teri Lewis
  • Katie Wolfe
Original Research


Evidence-based practice (EBP) is a model of professional decision-making in which practitioners integrate the best available evidence with client values/context and clinical expertise in order to provide services for their clients. This framework provides behavior analysts with a structure for pervasive use of the best available evidence in the complex settings in which they work. This structure recognizes the need for clear and explicit understanding of the strength of evidence supporting intervention options, the important contextual factors including client values that contribute to decision making, and the key role of clinical expertise in the conceptualization, intervention, and evaluation of cases. Opening the discussion of EBP in this journal, Smith (The Behavior Analyst, 36, 7–33, 2013) raised several key issues related to EBP and applied behavior analysis (ABA). The purpose of this paper is to respond to Smith’s arguments and extend the discussion of the relevant issues. Although we support many of Smith’s (The Behavior Analyst, 36, 7–33, 2013) points, we contend that Smith’s definition of EBP is significantly narrower than definitions that are used in professions with long histories of EBP and that this narrowness conflicts with the principles that drive applied behavior analytic practice. We offer a definition and framework for EBP that aligns with the foundations of ABA and is consistent with well-established definitions of EBP in medicine, psychology, and other professions. In addition to supporting the systematic use of research evidence in behavior analytic decision making, this definition can promote clear communication about treatment decisions across disciplines and with important outside institutions such as insurance companies and granting agencies.


Client values Decision making Empirically supported treatments Evidence-based practice Professional judgment Clinical expertise 


  1. Albin, R. W., Lucyshyn, J. M., Horner, R. H., & Flannery, K. B. (1996). Contextual fit for behavior support plans. In L. K. Koegel, R. L. Koegel, & G. Dunlap (Eds.), Positive behavioral support: Including people with difficult behaviors in the community (pp. 81–92). Baltimore: Brookes.Google Scholar
  2. American Occupational Therapy Association. (2008). Occupational therapy practice framework: domain and process (2nd ed.). American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62, 625–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Psychological Association (2005). Policy statement on evidence-based practice in psychology.
  4. American Psychological Association Presidential Task Force of Evidence-Based Practice. (2006). Evidence-based practice in psychology. American Psychologist, 61, 271–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (2005). Evidence-based practice in communication disorders [position statement].
  6. 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.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., & Risley, T. R. (1987). Some still-current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 20, 313–327.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Behavior Analyst Certification Board (2010). Guidelines for responsible conduct for behavior analysts.
  9. Benazzi, L., Horner, R. H., & Good, R. H. (2006). Effects of behavior support team composition on the technical adequacy and contextual-fit of behavior support plans. The Journal of Special Education, 40(3), 160–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bogduk, N., & Fraifeld, E. M. (2010). Proof or consequences: who shall pay for the evidence in pain medicine? Pain Medicine, 11(1), 1–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bushell, D., Jr., & Baer, D. M. (1994). Measurably superior instruction means close, continual contact with the relevant outcome data. Revolutionary! In R. Gardner III, D. M. Sainato, J. O. Cooper, T. E. Heron, W. L. Heward, J. Eshleman, & T. A. Grossi (Eds.), Behavior analysis in education: Focus on measurably superior instruction (pp. 3–10). Pacific Grove: Brooks.Google Scholar
  12. Carnine, D. (1992). Expanding the notion of teachers’ rights: access to tools that work. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(1), 13–19.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carr, J. E., Severtson, J. M., & Lepper, T. L. (2009). Noncontingent reinforcement is an empirically supported treatment for problem behavior exhibited by individuals with developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30, 44–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chorpita, B. F. (2003). The frontier of evidence-based practice. In A. E. Kazdin & J. R. Weisz (Eds.), Evidence-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents (pp. 42–59). New York: Oxford.Google Scholar
  15. Chorpita, B. F., Daleiden, E. L., & Weisz, J. R. (2005). Identifying and selecting the common elements of evidence based interventions: a distillation and matching model. Mental Health Services Research, 7, 5–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chorpita, B. F., Becker, K. D., & Daleiden, E. L. (2007). Understanding the common elements of evidence-based practice: misconceptions and clinical examples. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 46, 647–652.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cook, B. G., & Cook, S. C. (2013). Unraveling evidence-based practices in special education. Journal of Special Education, 47(2), 71–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson.Google Scholar
  19. Detrich, R. (Chair) (2009). Evidence-based, empirically supported, best practice: What does it all mean? Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the Association for Behavior Analysis International, Phoenix, AZ.Google Scholar
  20. Detrich, R., Slocum, T. A., & Spencer, T. D. (2013). Evidence-based education and best available evidence: Decision-making under conditions of uncertainty. In B. G. Cook, M. Tankersley, & T. J. Landrum (Eds.), Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities, 26 (pp. 21–44). Bingly, UK: Emerald.Google Scholar
  21. Embry, D. D. (2004). Community-based prevention using simple, low-cost, evidence-based kernels and behavior vaccines. Journal of Community Psychology, 32, 575–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Embry, D. D., & Biglan, A. (2008). Evidence-based kernels: fundamental units of behavioral influence. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 11, 75–113.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fisher, W. W., Piazza, C. C., & Roane, H. S. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of applied behavior analysis. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  24. Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature (FMHI publication #231). Tampa: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network.Google Scholar
  25. Goodheart, C. D. (2006). Evidence, endeavor, and expertise in psychology practice. In C. D. Goodheart, A. E. Kazdin, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Evidence-based psychotherapy: Where practice and research meet (pp. 37–61). Washington, D.C.: APA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Goodman, K. W. (2003). Ethics and evidence-based education: Fallibility and responsibility in clinical science. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Heward, W. L., et al. (Eds.). (2005). Focus on behavior analysis in education: Achievements, challenges, and opportunities. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  28. Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005a). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 165–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., Todd, A. W., & Lewis-Palmer, T. (2005b). Schoolwide positive behavior support. In L. M. Bambera & L. Kern (Eds.), Individualized supports for students with problem behaviors: Designing positive behavior plans (pp. 359–390). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  30. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 70, Fed. Reg., (2005).Google Scholar
  31. Institute of Education Sciences, US. Department of Education. (n.d.). What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook (No. Version 3.0). Washington DC. Retrieved from
  32. Institute of Medicine. (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  33. Johnston, J. M., & Pennypacker, H. S. (1993). Strategies and tactics of behavioral research (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  34. Jones, R. J., & Azrin, N. H. (1969). Behavioral engineering: stuttering as a function of stimulus duration during speech synchronization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2, 223–229.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kazdin, A. E. (2000). Psychotherapy for children and adolescents: Directions for research and practice. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Kratochwill, T. R., Hitchcock, J., Horner, R. H., Levin, J. R., Odom, S. L., Rindskopf, D. M., & Shadish, W. R. (2010). Single-case designs technical documentation. Retrieved from
  37. Kratochwill, T. R., Hitchcock, J. H., Horner, R. H., Levin, J. R., Odom, S. L., Rindskopf, D. M., et al. (2013). Single-case intervention research design standards. Remedial & Special Education, 34(1), 26–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Madden, G. J., Dube, W. V., Hackenberg, T. D., Hanley, G. P., & Lattal, K. A. (Eds.). (2013). American Psychological Association handbook of behavior analysis (Vol. 2). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi: 10.1037/13938-006.Google Scholar
  39. Maggin, D. M., O’Keeffe, B. V., & Johnson, A. H. (2011). A quantitative synthesis of single-subject meta-analyses in special education, 1985–2009. Exceptionality, 19, 109–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Maggin, D. M., Johnson, A. H., Chafouleas, S. M., Ruberto, L. M., & Berggren, M. (2012). A systematic evidence review of school-based group contingency interventions for students with challenging behavior. Journal of School Psychology, 50, 625–654.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McIntosh, K., Filter, K. J., Bennett, J. L., Ryan, C., & Sugai, G. (2010). Principles of sustainable prevention: designing scale–up of School–wide Positive Behavior Support to promote durable systems. Psychology in the Schools, 47(1), 5–21.Google Scholar
  42. National Autism Center. (2009). National Standards Project: Findings and conclusions. Randolph: National Autism Center.Google Scholar
  43. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110. (2002).Google Scholar
  44. Polsgrove, L. (2003). Reflections on the past and future. Education and Treatment of Children, 26, 337–344.Google Scholar
  45. Riley-Tillman, T. C., & Chafouleas, S. M. (2003). Using interventions that exist in the natural environment to increase treatment integrity and social influence in consultation. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 14(2), 139–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M., Gray, J. A., Haynes, R. B., & Richardson, W. S. (1996). Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. British Medical Journal, 312(7023), 71.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sackett, D. L., Straus, S. E., Richardson, W. S., Rosenberg, W., & Haynes, R. B. (Eds.). (2000). Evidence-based medicine: How to teach and practice EBM. Edinburgh: Livingstone.Google Scholar
  48. Shanahan, T., Callison, K., Carriere, C., Duke, N.K., Pearson, P.D., Schatschneider, C., et al. (2010). Improving reading comprehension in kindergarten through 3rd grade: A practice guide (NCEE 2010-4038). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Accessed 12 Sept 2013
  49. Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research: Evaluating experimental data in psychology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  50. Slocum, T. A., & Wilczynski, S. (2008). The unit of analysis in evidence-based practice. Invited paper presented at the meeting the Association for Behavior Analysis International, Chicago, Il.Google Scholar
  51. Slocum, T. A., Detrich, R., & Spencer, T. D. (2012a). Evaluating the validity of systematic reviews to identify empirically supported treatments. Education and Treatment of Children, 35, 201–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Slocum, T. A., Spencer, T. D., & Detrich, R. (2012b). Best available evidence: three complementary approaches. Education and Treatment of Children, 35, 27–55.Google Scholar
  53. Small, R. H. (2004). Maximize the likelihood of reimbursement when appealing managed care medical necessity denials. Getting Paid in Behavioral Healthcare, 9(12), 1–3.Google Scholar
  54. Smith, T. (2013). What is evidence-based behavior analysis? The Behavior Analyst, 36, 7–33.Google Scholar
  55. Strain, P. S., Barton, E. E., & Dunap, G. (2012). Lessons learned about the utility of social validity. Education and Treatment of Children, 35(2), 183–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wilczynski, S. M. (2012). Risk and strategic decision-making in developing evidence-based practice guidelines. Education and Treatment of Children, 35, 291–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wolf, 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.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zients, J. D. (2012). M-12-14. Memorandum to the heads of executive departs. From: Jeffrey D. Zients, Acting Director. Subject: use of evidence and evaluation in the 2014 Budget.…/2012/m-12-14.pdf. Accessed 30 Sept 2012

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Timothy A. Slocum
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ronnie Detrich
    • 2
  • Susan M. Wilczynski
    • 3
  • Trina D. Spencer
    • 4
  • Teri Lewis
    • 5
  • Katie Wolfe
    • 6
  1. 1.Utah State UniversityLoganUSA
  2. 2.Wing InstituteOaklandUSA
  3. 3.Ball State UniversityMuncieUSA
  4. 4.Northern Arizona UniversityFlagstaffUSA
  5. 5.Oregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA
  6. 6.University of South CarolinaColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations