Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33072502›Full record

ReviewJournal of contextual behavioral science2021

Selection by consequence: A response to Hayes and Fryling (2019).

Mark R Dixon, Jordan Belisle

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of contextual behavioral science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Mark R DixonUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, United States.
Jordan BelisleMissouri State University, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The paper by Hayes and Fryling (2019) seeks to inform readers that the Kantorian system of Interbehaviorism has been misunderstood and misrepresented by contextual behavior scientists. Furthermore, these authors suggest that much is to be gained by embracing the system developed by Kantor, most importantly that being large scale system building efforts. We disagree with this position, and find the Kantorian system to be of questionable relevancy and at risk of potential extinction within the behavioral community. We also have concerns that perhaps the insights provided by Hayes and Fryling will fail in recruitment of additional members to the Interbehavioral cause. Although the overarching theme of Interbehaviorism is present within emerging dynamical approaches to behavior science, adopting the vernacular of Kantor may be unnecessary to continue his tradition. We recommend allowing empirical selection to run its course in determining the eventual fate of Kantor's Interbehaviorism.

Indexed as

Functional contextualismInterbehaviorismKantorRationalism

Identifiers

PMID33072502
PMCPMC7550306

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.