{"title":"Explaining First Language Acquisition in Terms of Basic Behavioral Processes: Introduction to the Special Section","authors":"A. Petursdottir, Elena Nicoladis","doi":"10.1007/s40614-023-00393-y","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-023-00393-y","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44993,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Behavior Science","volume":"18 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139010399","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"A Neurobiological-Behavioral Approach to Predicting and Influencing Private Events","authors":"James N. Meindl, Jonathan W. Ivy","doi":"10.1007/s40614-023-00390-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-023-00390-1","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44993,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Behavior Science","volume":"67 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136377115","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Michelle A. Frankot, Michael E. Young, Cole Vonder Haar
{"title":"Understanding Individual Subject Differences through Large Behavioral Datasets: Analytical and Statistical Considerations","authors":"Michelle A. Frankot, Michael E. Young, Cole Vonder Haar","doi":"10.1007/s40614-023-00388-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-023-00388-9","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44993,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Behavior Science","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135982335","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Promoting Reciprocal Relations across Subfields of Behavior Analysis via Collaborations.","authors":"Mirari Elcoro, James W Diller, Juan C Correa","doi":"10.1007/s40614-023-00386-x","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40614-023-00386-x","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Several barriers may inhibit the growth of behavior analysis as a more integrated and collaborative field. Two such barriers are siloed environments that reinforce a basic-applied distinction, and a lack of translational research pathways. We describe the perils of silos, and elaborate on potential solutions to increase reciprocal relations among subfields in behavior analysis. We promote a five-tiered system to classify research in behavior analysis, and discuss literature on cultivating effective intra and cross-disciplinary collaborations, including using the framework of metacontingencies to understand collaborations. We also propose quantitative and qualitative measures to examine whether the potential solutions increase intra and interdisciplinary interactions. These measures include bibliometric (e.g., citations across fields), sociometric (e.g., social network analysis), and narrative analysis. We apply some of these measures to publications from 2011-2022 from the <i>Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior</i> and <i>Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis</i>, and argue that behavior analysis overall may benefit from a more collaborative approach.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40614-023-00386-x.</p>","PeriodicalId":44993,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Behavior Science","volume":"1 1","pages":"431-446"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10733255/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"52671719","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Michael Perone, Dorothea C Lerman, Stephanie M Peterson, Dean C Williams
{"title":"Report of the ABAI Task Force on Contingent Electric Skin Shock.","authors":"Michael Perone, Dorothea C Lerman, Stephanie M Peterson, Dean C Williams","doi":"10.1007/s40614-023-00379-w","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40614-023-00379-w","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As a task force appointed by the Executive Council of the Association for Behavior Analysis International (ABAI), we investigated the clinical use of contingent electric skin shock (CESS) in behavior analytic treatments for severe problem behavior. We studied how CESS is used in contemporary behavior analysis, reinforcement-based alternatives to CESS, and current ethical and professional guidelines for applied behavior analysts. We recommended that ABAI uphold clients' right to receive CESS when it is restricted to extreme cases and used under rigorous professional and legal oversight. Our recommendation was rejected by a vote of the full members of ABAI, who instead endorsed an alternative recommendation, developed by members of the Executive Council, that opposed the use of CESS under any condition. Here we present for the record our report and initial recommendations, the formal statement that was rejected by the members of ABAI, and the statement that was endorsed.</p>","PeriodicalId":44993,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Behavior Science","volume":"46 2","pages":"261-304"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10323060/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10186971","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"We Still Have a Lot to Learn.","authors":"Michael Perone","doi":"10.1007/s40614-023-00383-0","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40614-023-00383-0","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Use of contingent electric skin shock in the treatment of severe problem behavior has been criticized on the grounds that (a) it is not necessary because function-based procedures using positive reinforcement are just as effective; (b) it violates contemporary ethical standards; and (c) it lacks social validity. There are good reasons to challenge these claims. The meaning of \"severe problem behavior\" is imprecise and we should be cautious in our claims about how to treat it. It is not clear that reinforcement-only procedures are sufficient because they are commonly paired with psychotropic medication, and there is evidence that some instances of severe behavior may be refractory to reinforcement-only procedures. Ethical standards, as expressed by the Behavior Analysis Certification Board and the Association for Behavior Analysis International, do not prohibit punishment procedures. Social validity is a complex concept that can be understood and measured in multiple, potentially conflicting ways. Because we still have a lot to learn about these matters, we should be more skeptical of sweeping claims such as the three enumerated above.</p>","PeriodicalId":44993,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Behavior Science","volume":"46 2","pages":"305-311"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10322802/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10186973","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Tangle of Autonomy, Beneficence, Liberty, and Consent in the CESS Debate.","authors":"Stephanie M Peterson","doi":"10.1007/s40614-023-00378-x","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40614-023-00378-x","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This commentary on the task force report addresses the complex issues involved in autonomy, beneficence, liberty, and consent, which are often in competition in this and many other treatment issues for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities, especially those with limited vocal/verbal repertoires. The issues at hand are multifaceted, and behavior analysts should be aware there is much we do not know enough about. As good scientists, it is important to maintain an attitude of philosophic doubt and endeavor to deepen understanding.</p>","PeriodicalId":44993,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Behavior Science","volume":"46 2","pages":"321-328"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10322809/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10168238","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jennifer R Zarcone, Ivan Brown, Peter E Langdon, Michael Mullane, Mindy Scheithauer
{"title":"Response to ABAI Task Force on the Use of Contingent Electric Skin Shock.","authors":"Jennifer R Zarcone, Ivan Brown, Peter E Langdon, Michael Mullane, Mindy Scheithauer","doi":"10.1007/s40614-023-00381-2","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40614-023-00381-2","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this article, the authors provide their response to the Association for Behavior Analysis International (2022) position statement on the use of contingent electric skin shock (CESS). In this response, we address concerns raised by the task force regarding limitations of the Zarcone et al. (2020) review article in which both methodological and ethical concerns were raised about the quality of research in the use of CESS with people with disabilities in the treatment of challenging behavior. We note that with the exception of the Judge Rotenberg Center in Massachusetts, no state or country currently supports the use of CESS as it is not recognized as the standard of care in any other program, school, or facility.</p>","PeriodicalId":44993,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Behavior Science","volume":"46 2","pages":"349-354"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10323054/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10168237","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Additional Comments on the Use of Contingent Electric Skin Shock.","authors":"Wayne W Fisher, Brian D Greer, Daniel R Mitteer","doi":"10.1007/s40614-023-00382-1","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40614-023-00382-1","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Prior to the ABAI member vote to decide between two alternative position statements on contingent electric skin shock (CESS), the current authors helped draft a consensus statement supporting the abolition of CESS. In this commentary, we provide additional, supporting information for that consensus statement by (1) showing that the extant literature does not support the supposition that CESS is more efficacious than less-intrusive interventions; (2) providing data showing that implementing interventions that are less intrusive than CESS does not lead to overreliance on the use of physical or mechanical restraint to control destructive behavior; and (3) discussing the ethical and public relations issues that arise when behavior analysts use painful skin shock to reduce destructive behavior in persons with autism or intellectual disability.</p>","PeriodicalId":44993,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Behavior Science","volume":"46 2","pages":"339-348"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10323055/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10186970","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"When Science Cannot Guide us: A Call to Action for Applied Behavior Analysts.","authors":"Dorothea C Lerman","doi":"10.1007/s40614-023-00377-y","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40614-023-00377-y","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Evidence presented in the ABAI Task Force Report on Contingent Electric Skin Shock (CESS) revealed serious ethical, clinical, and practical problems with the contemporary use of CESS. As a member of the task force, I ultimately concluded that our recommended position statement (\"Position A\") was a misguided attempt to uphold the field's commitment to client choice. Furthermore, information gathered by the task force supports an urgent call to find solutions to two additional troubling issues: a severe shortage of treatment services for severe problem behavior and the near-absence of research on treatment-resistant behavior. In this commentary, I discuss reasons Position A was not a tenable stance and why we must do better to help our most vulnerable clients.</p>","PeriodicalId":44993,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Behavior Science","volume":"46 2","pages":"313-320"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10322805/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9810649","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}