Question
The specific studies should be analytic, behavioral, and applied in the Applied Behavioral Analysis realm. Besides displaying a certain generality, the work ought to be practical, theoretically systematic, and high-tech. Everything that has social significance becomes investigated by applied and how important it is to subjects. Behavioral provides a precise description of the behavior as it also suggests the ways of measuring. Analytic portrays investigational control over the behavior’s non-occurrence and occurrence. For experimenters to manage behavior analysis, they must exercise control over behaviors.
Cipriano et al. (2017) article
Cipriano et al. (2017) study summarizes the self-destructive, nonsuicidal behaviors. Due to the lack of several of the ABA features outlined in Baer et al.’s 1968 study, the article does not lie under the behavior analytic category. The qualified ones are usually theoretically systematic, technologically advanced, analytic, behavioral, and applied. Furthermore, they should have generality to some extent. The paper’s objective involves organizing a large body of knowledge about NSSID (nonsuicidal self-injurious disorder).
Interestingly, this study wasn’t relevant to particular persons on a social level, and the authors never undertook any applied research. That accurate measuring of NSSI was inexistent means that this study could not have been behavioral. Any research work should accurately evaluate the real behavior that needs advancement, NSSI in this case, for us to consider it behavioral. Although certain study material was cited as NSSID contributors, there was no proof of experimental control over existence and non-existence. They did not contribute enough for them to be repeatable or effective relationships.
Researchers describe their search methods and information sources at the beginning of the article, making it seem as though the study can be categorized as technological. However, to be included in the review, their justifications for exclusion were biased, making it impossible for their research to be replicated. All of their procedures were documented in writing. However, it was not sufficiently thorough and thorough. Not all surgical techniques were specified and clearly and in-depth detailed. This study was not conceptually systematic because no behavioral interventions were developed from fundamental behavior analytic principles. Due to the lack of an experimental control or functional link, I failed to find any analytical dimensions. Despite the fact that this study found enough information about NSSID, it lacked an effective dimension because the behavior in question had neither clinical nor social importance. This study failed to show universality since no behavior change that could be achieved across different subjects or environments was seen. This article failed to mention any of the seven applied behavior analysis dimensions. Hence it cannot be considered behavior analytical.
Petscher & Bailey's (2006) article
On the other hand, Petscher & Bailey (2006) focused on investigating the impact of self-monitoring, prompting, and training on the behavior of employees in a class full of learners with infirmities. The paper presents all forms of behavior analytics, having applied every ABA dimension successfully. In an applied fashion, researchers explain why their experiment was relevant and influential (socially) to all respondents as they introduced the article (applied). The majority of staff members and instructional assistants in public schools lack the necessary training to assist children with disabilities. The research employed a self-monitoring strategy to enable instructional assistants to personally record their behavior. It also utilized tactile hints delivered by a vibrating pager to increase assistants’ precision in implementing a class-based token economy. Previous studies have shown that doing so can help staff members who work with people with impairments behave better. Something must be observable and measurable in order for it to be considered behavioral. Data was gathered throughout sessions on a personal computer or paper datasheet. Using the self-monitoring sheets, the observers noted each time a respondent was given a chance to react and whether it was done accurately or inaccurately. If a person is determining how behavior relates functionally to environmental variables, they are being analytical.
According to the researchers, there is a causal link between good staff development and a drop in behavioral issues in the classroom. The research served as an example of the technology factor by carefully outlining all the procedures and interventions that were administered to every participant while stating the time. As it adhered to the fundamental principles of behavior analysis, it was conceptually methodical as well. The researchers utilized self-monitoring, a token economy, prompting, and reinforcement techniques. The research was beneficial because it illustrated how the concepts were put into practice to alter behavior. The initial data gathering occurred in a typical class setting. There was data gathering to demonstrate a substantial behavior shift in the class context following the accuracy response, self-monitoring, and training. Implementation of maintenance following the intervention demonstrated some generalizability in the article. They eventually expanded the ten-minute sessions to around an hour. It was a requirement for the subjects to mark their perceived closeness to the target goal as the process of self-monitoring got in progress. The fact that this research occurred in just a single context with similar three subjects means that there was no demonstration of significant generalizability. It is correct to infer that the publication portrayed every behavioral dimension in line with Baer et al.’s 1968 study. As a result, it was a behavior analytic article.
The specific studies should be analytic, behavioral, and applied in the Applied Behavioral Analysis realm. Besides displaying a certain generality, the work ought to be practical, theoretically systematic, and high-tech. Everything that has social significance becomes investigated by applied and how important it is to subjects. Behavioral provides a precise description of the behavior as it also suggests the ways of measuring. Analytic portrays investigational control over the behavior’s non-occurrence and occurrence. For experimenters to manage behavior analysis, they must exercise control over behaviors.
Cipriano et al. (2017) article
Cipriano et al. (2017) study summarizes the self-destructive, nonsuicidal behaviors. Due to the lack of several of the ABA features outlined in Baer et al.’s 1968 study, the article does not lie under the behavior analytic category. The qualified ones are usually theoretically systematic, technologically advanced, analytic, behavioral, and applied. Furthermore, they should have generality to some extent. The paper’s objective involves organizing a large body of knowledge about NSSID (nonsuicidal self-injurious disorder).
Interestingly, this study wasn’t relevant to particular persons on a social level, and the authors never undertook any applied research. That accurate measuring of NSSI was inexistent means that this study could not have been behavioral. Any research work should accurately evaluate the real behavior that needs advancement, NSSI in this case, for us to consider it behavioral. Although certain study material was cited as NSSID contributors, there was no proof of experimental control over existence and non-existence. They did not contribute enough for them to be repeatable or effective relationships.
Researchers describe their search methods and information sources at the beginning of the article, making it seem as though the study can be categorized as technological. However, to be included in the review, their justifications for exclusion were biased, making it impossible for their research to be replicated. All of their procedures were documented in writing. However, it was not sufficiently thorough and thorough. Not all surgical techniques were specified and clearly and in-depth detailed. This study was not conceptually systematic because no behavioral interventions were developed from fundamental behavior analytic principles. Due to the lack of an experimental control or functional link, I failed to find any analytical dimensions. Despite the fact that this study found enough information about NSSID, it lacked an effective dimension because the behavior in question had neither clinical nor social importance. This study failed to show universality since no behavior change that could be achieved across different subjects or environments was seen. This article failed to mention any of the seven applied behavior analysis dimensions. Hence it cannot be considered behavior analytical.
Petscher & Bailey's (2006) article
On the other hand, Petscher & Bailey (2006) focused on investigating the impact of self-monitoring, prompting, and training on the behavior of employees in a class full of learners with infirmities. The paper presents all forms of behavior analytics, having applied every ABA dimension successfully. In an applied fashion, researchers explain why their experiment was relevant and influential (socially) to all respondents as they introduced the article (applied). The majority of staff members and instructional assistants in public schools lack the necessary training to assist children with disabilities. The research employed a self-monitoring strategy to enable instructional assistants to personally record their behavior. It also utilized tactile hints delivered by a vibrating pager to increase assistants’ precision in implementing a class-based token economy. Previous studies have shown that doing so can help staff members who work with people with impairments behave better. Something must be observable and measurable in order for it to be considered behavioral. Data was gathered throughout sessions on a personal computer or paper datasheet. Using the self-monitoring sheets, the observers noted each time a respondent was given a chance to react and whether it was done accurately or inaccurately. If a person is determining how behavior relates functionally to environmental variables, they are being analytical.
According to the researchers, there is a causal link between good staff development and a drop in behavioral issues in the classroom. The research served as an example of the technology factor by carefully outlining all the procedures and interventions that were administered to every participant while stating the time. As it adhered to the fundamental principles of behavior analysis, it was conceptually methodical as well. The researchers utilized self-monitoring, a token economy, prompting, and reinforcement techniques. The research was beneficial because it illustrated how the concepts were put into practice to alter behavior. The initial data gathering occurred in a typical class setting. There was data gathering to demonstrate a substantial behavior shift in the class context following the accuracy response, self-monitoring, and training. Implementation of maintenance following the intervention demonstrated some generalizability in the article. They eventually expanded the ten-minute sessions to around an hour. It was a requirement for the subjects to mark their perceived closeness to the target goal as the process of self-monitoring got in progress. The fact that this research occurred in just a single context with similar three subjects means that there was no demonstration of significant generalizability. It is correct to infer that the publication portrayed every behavioral dimension in line with Baer et al.’s 1968 study. As a result, it was a behavior analytic article.