The weight of harm: A Response to "Editor's Note: Societal changes and expression of concern about Rekers and Lovaas' (1974) Behavioral Treatment of Deviant Sex-Role Behaviors in a Male Child".

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.

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.

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Contextualizing Contemporary Research Ethics Policies and Practices in Significant Historical Events.Behavior analysis in practice · 2025
   Article
2. In Defense of Applied Behavior Analysis and Evidence-Based Practice.Perspectives on behavior science · 2025
   Article
3. Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI): A Tutorial on Ethical Data Practices.Behavior analysis in practice · 2025
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Erratum issued
  Correction to: The weight of harm: A Response to "Editor's Note: Societal changes and expression of concern about Rekers and Lovaas' (1974) Behavioral Treatment of Deviant Sex-Role Behaviors in a Male Child".2022

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as