The behavior analyst today 

About: The behavior analyst today is an academic journal. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Applied behavior analysis & Population. It has an ISSN identifier of 1539-4352. Over the lifetime, 370 publications have been published receiving 4774 citations.

An introduction to relational frame theory: basics and applications

Abstract: Relational Frame Theory (RFT) has made a very respectable empirical and theoretical showing in the psychological literature during the past decade, but the theory still remains unknown or unappreciated by most cognitive and behavioral psychologists. This article highlights why this might be the case, and presents RFT in a simplified, systematic manner, in part by comparing it to a well-known cognitive model. Finally, the article outlines RFT's relatively unique contributions to psychological accounts of language and cognition, and addresses some of RFT's scientific and applied implications. ********** Relational Frame Theory (RFT) has had a notable presence in the psychology literature since its development over a decade ago. Well over 30 empirical RFT studies have been published in peer-reviewed psychology journals in the past 10 years, and an even larger number of theoretical and descriptive treatments of it have been published as well. Recently, a book length treatment of RFT has been made available (Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, & Roche, 2001), summarizing supporting data and extending RFT analyses to a variety of psychological phenomena. In addition, RFT principles form the theoretical background of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT; see, for example, Hayes, Strosahl, & Wilson, 1999). Given the relatively frequent appearances of Relational Frame Theory in psychological literature, it is perhaps surprising that the theory remains virtually unknown outside behavioral circles, and even unrecognized or misunderstood by many academic behavioral psychologists. RFT has largely escaped notice and comprehension for at least three reasons. First, RFT intentionally makes use of technical, non-colloquial language to allow a scientific treatment of cognition. As such, published descriptions of RFT are undeniably technical, and not readily accessible to those who have not spent a considerable amount of time trying to understand the theory. Second, its significance and relevance to human psychopathology and language in general do not immediately seem obvious due to its nontraditional account of these phenomena. Finally, non-behavioral psychologists have long assumed that behaviorism has little or nothing to offer to the understanding of human language and cognition. Theories of these fundamentally important human processes that arise from the behavioral tradition are thus easy to ignore. The first purpose of this article is to convey the principles of Relational Frame Theory in relatively easy to understand fashion. In doing so, it is hoped that what RFT has to do with language, cognition, and psychopathology will become apparent. Since a vast amount of cognitive literature regarding these topic areas currently exists, RFT's relatively unique and important contributions to this literature will be outlined as well. To accomplish these goals, a popular and widely-known cognitive model of a "fear network" (Lang, 1985) will first be presented and briefly described. Lang's model contains some cosmetic similarities to RFT that will hopefully orient the reader to the analysis that follows. Following the description of this model, an RFT account of the same information presented in the model will be advanced, allowing a systematic introduction to the reader of the defining features of RFT. Finally, several reasons why RFT offers a unique and important approach to language, cognition, and human suffering will be described. Empirical evidence and more extensive arguments of technical points about RFT made throughout the article can be found, for example, in Hayes et al. (2001). RELATIONAL FRAME THEORY: BASICS AND APPLICATIONS Lang's Fear Network Lang's (1985) exemplary model of a fear network is presented succinctly in Figure 1. Stimulus propositions (indicated in ovals in Figure 1) involve "information about prompting external stimuli and the context in which they occur," and response propositions refer to "information about responding in this context, including expressive verbal behavior, overt acts, and the visceral and somatic events that mediate arousal and actions" (p. …

In Search of Program Implementation: 792 Replications of the Teaching-Family Model

Abstract: This article discusses a solution-oriented and incremental approach to solving major social problems. If we are to solve important social problems such as child abuse, delinquency, and illiteracy, researchers need to generate effective programs that can be replicated and social service providers need to implement those programs with fidelity. The Teaching-Family Model, based on over 30 years of research, evaluation, and program experience, has been replicated across North America. We present an analysis of 792 attempted replications over a period of 15 years. The analysis reveals certain aspects of the treatment program that were found to be sufficient conditions for treatment program implementation and survival. These "Site services" are described and the implications for effective practices in services for children are presented. Keywords: Teaching family homes, replication, delinquency, organizational behavior management in social services INTRODUCTION Children, families, and vulnerable adults face a multitude of problems in our society. The statistics are clear and the newspapers each day carry personal reminders of the tragedies that abound in families, schools, and neighborhoods across North America. For a number of these difficult problems, the popular conception is that "nothing works." Juvenile delinquency, teenage pregnancy, school drop outs, illiteracy, poverty, low birth weight babies, child abuse and neglect, domestic violence, and so on seem to occur at alarming rates in spite of our efforts as a society. Part of the problem lies with the kinds of research that have been supported for the past several decades across North America. During his term as president of the American Psychological Association, Frank Farley (1994) identified this issue and suggested a change in the research agenda. "I want SOLUTIONS to the problems confronting us. We already KNOW THE STATISTICS. Psychology has the greatest potential of any creation of the human mind in the past several centuries to SOLVE some of these dreadful problems and we must focus on those SOLUTIONS. We need more solution-oriented research, more research directed at solving these massive human problems. Significant parts of our research establishment have for decades been enslaved in a publish or perish paradigm they can't seem to break out of, and it often encourages quick studies on easy and minor problems. According to citation analyses, the overwhelming majority of published studies have no demonstrable effect on anyone, anywhere, anytime, and the vast submerged corpus of unpublished research presumably has even less impact! These are often clever studies, bringing to bear monumental research methods and skills upon minor topics apparently to no end. No end, at least, where the critical problems confronting the human race are concerned." (p. 3, capitalization in the original) Another part of the problem lies with the providers of human services. Many research and evaluation studies have pointed to effective intervention processes but these are often ignored or are "conceptually adopted" without significant change in actual services. Lipsey (1992) examined over 400 studies of treatment for delinquent behavior and found that, "When the researcher was more closely involved in the design, implementation, and monitoring of treatment, the effects were larger. While this could reflect some experimenter bias artifact, it is also plausible that it represents the effects of greater treatment integrity, i.e., consistent delivery of the treatment as intended to all clients" (p. 10). Shadish (1984) studied adoption rates of social science solutions and found that, "When an attempt is made to implement those solutions, powerful social networks are activated whose interests have been ignored and who are, therefore, often hostile to implementing the solution" (p. 727). There is no doubt that applied research is difficult to do and that organizational changes to accommodate new intervention strategies and techniques are fraught with barriers and administrative headaches. …

Perspective-Taking and Theory of Mind: A Relational Frame Account.

Abstract: Cognitive perspective-taking has attracted considerable attention in the mainstream developmental literature, and is most commonly studied under the rubric of Theory of Mind The current article reviews the levels of understanding of informational states that are believed to underlie cognitive perspective-taking from this conceptual framework An alternative approach to perspective-taking from a functional behavioral framework is also presented The concepts and methodologies behind this approach are driven by a modern behavioral account of human language and cognition known as Relational Frame Theory As well as providing a brief summary of the core concepts of Relational Frame Theory, the article presents the relational frame account of cognitive perspective-taking The empirical evidence in support of this view of perspective-taking as well as related research on false belief and deception are reviewed The overlap between the Theory of Mind and Relational Frame Theory approaches to perspective-taking is discussed

Clinical significance of the Outcome Questionnaire (OQ-45.2).

Abstract: The Outcome Questionnaire-45.2 (OQ-45.2) is purported to measure important areas of functioning (symptoms, interpersonal problems social role functioning and quality of life) that are of central interest in mental health. In recent years research employing the OQ-45.2 has focused on tracking patient change over time and indicating if and when patients return to a normal state of functioning as proposed by criteria for clinically significant change. This study examined the OQ-45.2 cut-off scores for clinical significance by comparing concordance rates with cut-off scores based on other measures of psychotherapy outcome. Instruments of each area of functioning were administered to patients undergoing psychotherapy at the beginning and end of treatment. Each patient's degree of success was then classified by each instrument and differences between the measures were examined. The results provided evidence for the construct validity of the concept of clinical significance and the OQ-45.2 cut-off scores demarking the boundaries for functional/dysfunctional samples. Correspondence between measure estimates for classifying patients as functional or dysfunctional averaged 85%. Estimates of agreement between measures classification of patients as meeting criteria for clinically significant change averaged 65%. Implications of these results were discussed in reference to use of the OQ-45.2 and the concept of clinical significance. ********** Contemporary research focused on applied clinical questions often relies heavily on using operational definitions of meaningful change at the level of the individual patient. This research includes studies that explore the dose-effect relationship, i.e., the amount of therapy needed for recovery (e.g., Anderson & Lambert, 2001; Maling, Gurtman, & Howard, 1995). In such studies a definition of meaningful change (clinically significant change) allows researchers to estimate the number of sessions needed to meet such an event. In addition, studies aimed at improving the quality of services require operational definitions to judge a particular patient's treatment response and the need for additional services (Kordy, Hannover, & Richard, 2001; Lambert, Hansen & Finch, 2001; Lueger et al, 2001). Finally, the call for presentation of the results of clinical trials research that include estimates of the practical consequences of treatment for individual patients is widespread (e.g., Barlow, 198 1; Hugdahl & Ost, 1981; Kendall, 1999; Saunders, Howard, & Newman, 1988). The most frequently used method for operationalizing clinical significance for the preceding research activities is that described by Jacobson and Truax (1991). They proposed a two step criteria. The first step entails an evaluation of reliable change by calculating a Reliable Change Index (RCI). As defined by Jacobson and Truax, the RCI is obtained by subtracting a pre-treatment score from a post-treatment score and dividing by the standard error of the measurement (Christensen & Mendoza, 1986 (1); Jacobson, Follette, & Revenstorff, 1984). A particular change is considered to be reliable when it exceeds measurement error at the .05 level of confidence. The second step consists of defining a cut-off point between functional and dysfunctional samples. This cut-off represents the point at which a person's score is more likely to fall in the distribution of scores characteristic of normal functioning. The use of this social comparison methodology has the advantage of referencing a client's state of functioning against peer functioning rather than demanding that the client be asymptomatic in order to be considered healthy (Kendall & Grove, 1988; Kendall, Marrs-Garcia, Nath, & Sheldrick, 1999). When both the RCI and the normative group comparison criterion are met, the change is regarded as clinically significant according to the Jacobson method. Despite widespread use of the Jacobson method (Ogles, Lunnen, & Bonesteel, 2001), little research has been conducted on its' validity. …

Resurgence of Previously Reinforced Responding: Research and Application

Abstract: Previously learned responses recur under a variety of conditions. Whether such recurrence is good news or bad news depends on the circumstances of the recurrence. Recurrence of a previously eliminated problem behavior is bad news, but the recurrence of a previously established strategy that facilitates constructive problem solving receives a warmer reception. One label attached to some recurrent responding is resurgence. The term is used to describe a procedure, to describe the behavioral effect of the procedure, and to describe a behavioral process (cf. Mazur, 2006). These three uses of the term often are concurrent. Laboratory studies with nonhuman and human animals have isolated some of the variables that contribute to resurgence. In this review, we consider these variables and their implications for facilitating or reducing the likelihood of past behavior recurring in applied research and practice (hereafter, application). Resurgence is said to occur when a previously learned response recurs following a hiatus from that response, during which time some other response first is reinforced and thereafter extinguished. It is during the final condition that the previously learned response resurges. The process of resurgence thus involves three phases. In the first, or reinforcement, phase, a response, A, is reinforced. In the second, or alternative reinforcement, phase, a second response, B, is reinforced while Response A is extinguished. In the third, or resurgence, phase, Response B is extinguished while extinction remains in effect for Response A. The recurrence of Response A is labeled as resurgence. Resurgence may be distinguished from several other circumstances wherein previously learned responses recur. Spontaneous recovery similarly occurs following extinction of such responses, and after an absence of exposure to the extinction situation. It differs from resurgence in that other responses are not (systematically) reinforced during extinction of the response that later spontaneously recovers (but see Cleland, Guerin, Foster, and Temple [2001] for a discussion of circumstances in which resurgence may be considered an instance of spontaneous recovery). Reinstatement occurs when a previously learned response recurs during a period of response-independent delivery of the reinforcer previously used to maintain the response, but after that response first is extinguished. In reinstatement, the response recurs as a result of the evocative, discriminative stimulus effects of the now response-independent presentations of the previously established reinforcer (cf. Franks & Lattal, 1976). Response induction or response generalization may be considered instances of response recurrence in which topographies develop that are similar to the reinforced one. The distinguishing features of these phenomena are important for application because they may result in the re-emergence of responding under different conditions or in different forms. Although all four types of response recurrence have implications for application, the present analysis is restricted to resurgence. Examples of Resurgence The first systematic experimental analysis of resurgence appears to have been that of Carey (1951; [see also Carey, 1953]). Two groups of rats were trained to lever press. With one group, a sequence of two lever-press responses that occurred within 0.25 s of one another, which were described as "doubles," first was reinforced. With the other group, only single responses were reinforced. Subsequently, the conditions were reversed for the two groups such that the "doubles" group received reinforcers following single responses and the "singles" group received reinforcers following double responses. In a final phase, lever pressing was extinguished for both groups. During extinction, as the number of instances of the last-reinforced response sequence (singles or doubles) decreased, the frequency of the other, first reinforced, pattern increased. …