Indexador

Abstract Multilevel modeling is a promising approach that can be applied to evaluate intervention effectiveness and explain variability in intervention effectiveness in single-case experimental design research. This approach is recommended as it accounts for the nested data structure and allows to model complexities such as autocorrelation, nonlinear time trends and the inclusion of participant characteristics as moderators to account for variability in intervention effectiveness. Therefore, choices need to be made to select the most appropriate multilevel model given the research question and the need to model (some or all) complexities. This brief commentary provides criteria that can be used to inform appropriate model selection and ends with a recommendation for best practices for model building. Our hope is to further enhance the understanding of the appropriateness and applicability of the multilevel modeling approach to analyze single-case experimental data.

Resumo não informado pela fonte indexada.

Abstract Research on human language started to change when Murray Sidman and colleagues demonstrated that a participant was able to derive unreinforced stimulus relations after conditional discrimination training. This work provided the basis for a novel approach to research on symbolic behavior and fostered the development of three main theoretical accounts: stimulus equivalence (SE), relational frame theory (RFT), and naming theory (NT). These accounts unfolded in the last decades of the twentieth century, promoting intense debate and discussion within behavior analysis. Although experimental research emerging from these three accounts is still highly active today, the theoretical discussions have, to a large extent, faded. Considering the importance of rekindling a dialogue, this article aims to describe the differences among the three accounts, but focus on their common points. We conclude by arguing that developing a more complete behavior-analytic account of human language would be served best by considering both research and theoretical analyses of SE, RFT and NT. Finally, we provide examples of two successful research groups that adopted this approach and in doing so have advanced our understanding of language within behavior analysis.

Resumo não informado pela fonte indexada.

Resumo não informado pela fonte indexada.

Abstract The concept of metacontingencies, developed within behavior analysis as a conceptual tool, enabled the emergence of a new field of study on the cultural level of selection (Todorov, 2006). Since then, the concept has evolved and has been used to understand social phenomena, ranging from experimental research to applied studies. The present study investigates how metacontingency studies have evolved by analyzing the co-authorship network analysis of academic publications on metacontingencies, since it was originally presented in 1986. It differs from previous reviews on metacontingencies by looking at academic production as a complex system characterized by evolving network structures interacting with a surrounding environment. The analysis is based on bibliometric data from 212 peer-reviewed articles. It presents an evolving network of academic publication from a temporal perspective, demonstrating the formation of interconnected clusters that do not correspond to national and formal organizational boundaries, as well as an increase of publication beyond the traditional readership of behavior analysis. This network structure is discussed in light of research on network theory (Centola, 2018) highlighting the importance of clusters as spaces of social reinforcement as wide bridges through which complex information may spread. The article also uses culturo-behavior analysis (Sandaker et al., 2019) to discuss the role of structure, function, and processes in the evolution of such collaborative networks. Both network theory and culturo-behavior science provide a framework that permeates the discussion about network growth, the aggregate product of academic cooperation, future directions, and potential risks of this research field.

Abstract A neurodiversity movement (NDM) has gained momentum, mainly driven by autistic self-advocates. The main argument of the NDM is that neurodivergent people experience discrimination that is on par with the historical discrimination of other minority groups. In this article, we propose a behavior analyst’s perspective on the NDM. We first explore the history and emergence of the concept of neurodiversity and its neurological as well as psychological basis. We consider its potential for generating what some consider a zero-sum game, in which one group makes all the gains potentially at the expense of another group. We finish with the suggestion that a win–win situation is possible if the focus shifts proactively to advocacy for all persons with autism, including those with very high support needs who often are not able to advocate actively for themselves and who tend to benefit greatly from evidence-based behavior-analytic interventions.

Resumo não informado pela fonte indexada.

Resumo não informado pela fonte indexada.

Resumo não informado pela fonte indexada.