Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22479668›Full record

ArticleBehavior analysis in practice2010

Toward effective and preferred programming: a case for the objective measurement of social validity with recipients of behavior-change programs.

Gregory P Hanley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior analysis in practice, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Neurodiversity-Affirming Applied Behavior Analysis.Behavior analysis in practice · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Gregory P HanleyWestern New England College.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The adoption of effective behavioral interventions and teaching strategies for young children is largely influenced by the extent to which stakeholders find the procedures appropriate and the effects important. Stakeholder values have been described by measures of social validity in applied behavior analysis, and these measures have been a part of behavior-analytic research and practice since their important characteristics were described in the late 1970s. The typically subjective nature of the social validation process appears, however, to have marginalized children and other usual recipients of behavior-change procedures (i.e., individuals with autism or intellectual disabilities) from social validation processes. Therefore, the importance of including recipients of behavior-change procedures in the social validation process and methods for doing so are described in this paper.

Indexed as

Autismchoiceconcurrent chainsintellectual disabilitypreferencerecipient inclusionsocial validity

Identifiers

PMID22479668
PMCPMC3004679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.