Abstract
Past researchers have commented on the role of specifying relevant subject characteristics in determining the generality of experimental findings. Knowledge of subject selection criteria is important in interpreting and replicating research results. Such knowledge, as compared with many other historical and demographic characteristics of the subject, is likely to be related to a procedure’s effectiveness. Data indicated that the majority of articles published in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis do not provide an adequate description of subject selection criteria. The failure to provide detailed information concerning subject selection criteria can prevent systematic replication of research results. The relatively low cost inclusion of complete descriptions of subject selection criteria would enhance the generality of applied behavior analysis research by facilitating systematic inductive manipulations and replications.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., & Risley, T. R. Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1968, 1, 91–97.
Campbell, D. T. Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings. Psychological Bulletin, 1957, 54, 297–312.
Campbell, D. T. From description to experimentation: Interpreting trends as quasiexperiments. In E. W. Harris (Ed.), Problems in measuring change. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1963.
Campbell, D. T. Reforms as experiments. American Psychologist, 1969, 24, 409–429.
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1966.
Cohen, J. A. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1960, 20, 37–46.
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. The design and conduct of quasi-experiments and true experiments in field settings. In M. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Skokie, Ill.: Rand McNally, 1976.
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. Quasi-Experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1979.
Fisher, R. A. The design of experiments. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1935.
Hayes, S. C., Rincover, A., & Solnick, J. V. The technical drift of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1980, 13, 275–285.
Hersen, M., & Barlow, D. H. Single case experimental designs. New York: Pergamon Press, 1976.
Homer, A. L., & Peterson, L. Differential reinforcement of other behavior: A preferred response elimination procedure. Behavior Therapy, 1980, 11, 449–471.
Johnston, J. M., & Pennypacker, H. S. Strategies and tactics of human behavioral research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1980.
Kazdin, A. E. Methodological and assessment considerations in evaluating reinforcement programs in applied settings. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973, 6, 517–531.
Leitenberg, H. The use of single-case methodology in psychotherapy research. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1973, 82, 87–101.
McNamara, J. R., & MacDonough, T. S. Some methodological considerations in the design and implementation of behavior therapy research. Behavior Therapy, 1972, 3, 361–378.
Sidman, M. Tactics of scientific research. New York: Basic Books, 1960.
Skinner, B. F. Operant behavior. In W. K. Honig (Ed.), Operant behavior: Areas of research and application. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by a Summer Research Fellowship to the second author by the University of Missouri-Columbia Research Council.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Homer, A.L., Peterson, L. & Wonderlich, S.A. Subject Selection in Applied Behavior Analysis. BEHAV ANALYST 6, 39–45 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03391872
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03391872