Advertisement

Some Factors Limiting the Applicability of Applied Behavioral Research

Descriptive Information in JABA Articles
  • R. Wayne Fuqua
  • Jan Bachman
Part of the Applied Clinical Psychology book series (NSSB)

Abstract

Despite recent controversy about the status and goals of applied behavior analysis research (e.g., Azrin, 1977; Baer, 1981; Deitz, 1978; Hayes, Rincover, & Solnick, 1980), most researchers hope that applied behavioral research might prove directly or indirectly applicable to the prevention and/or remediation of human problems. Thus, there is at least some expectation that research findings or conceptual understandings derived from that research will be applicable beyond the subjects, settings, and behaviors of the original research. The purpose of this article is to discuss some factors that may limit effective application of applied behavior analysis research and to suggest how these limitations might be overcome.

Keywords

Behavior Analysis Behavioral Research Descriptive Information Applied Behavior Analysis Behavior Analyst 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Azrin, N. H. (1977). A strategy for applied research: Learning based but outcome oriented. American Psychologist, 32, 140–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baer, D. M. (1981). A flight of behavior analysis. The Behavior Analyst, 4, 85–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Budd, K. S., Green, D. R., & Baer, D. M. (1976). An analysis of multiple misplaced parental contingencies. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 9, 59–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Catania, A. C. (1966). Concurrent operants. In W. K. Honig (Ed.), Operant behavior: Areas of research and application. (pp. 213–270). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  6. Deitz, S. M. (1978). Current status of applied behavior analysis: Science versus technology. American Psychologist, 33, 805–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. de Villiers, P. A. (1977). Choice in concurrent schedules and a quantitative formulation of the law of effect. In W. K. Honig & J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.), Handbook of operant behavior (pp. 233–287). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  8. Frederickson, L. W., & Simon, S. J. Modifying how people smoke: Instructional control and generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 431–432.Google Scholar
  9. Galizio, M. (1979). Contingency-shaped and rule-governed behavior: Instructional control of human loss avoidance. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 31, 53–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hayes, S.C., Rincover, A., & Solnick, J. V. (1980). The technical drift in applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 275–285.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Homer, A. L., Peterson, L., & Wonderlich, S. A. (1983). Subject selection in applied behavior analysis. The Behavior Analyst, 6, 39–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Johnston, J. M., & Pennypacker, H. S. (1980). Strategies and tactics of human behavioral research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  13. Kohlenberg, R. J. (1973). Operant conditioning of human anal sphincter pressure. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6, 201–208.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. McDowell, J. J. (1982). The importance of Herrstein’s mathematical statement of the law of effect for behavior therapy. American Psychologist, 37, 771–779.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Michael, J. (1982). Distinguishing between discriminative and motivational functions of stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 149–155.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Peterson, L., Homer, A. L., & Wonderlich, S. A. (1982). The integrity of independent variables in behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 15, 477–492.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Poppen, R. (1982). The fixed-interval scallop in human affairs. The Behavior Analyst, 5, 127–136.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  19. Ullman, L. P., & Krasner, L. (1975). A psychological approach to abnormal behavior (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  20. Zigler, E., & Phillips, L. (1961). Psychiatric diagnosis: A critique. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 3, 607–618.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Wayne Fuqua
    • 1
  • Jan Bachman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyWestern Michigan UniversityKalamazooUSA

Personalised recommendations