Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38559605›Full record

ReviewPostepy psychiatrii neurologii2023

From direct contingencies to derived relations: the ever-developing nature of theory and practice in behavior analysis.

Krystyna Pomorska, Paweł Ostaszewski

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Postepy psychiatrii neurologii, 2023. 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.

Krystyna PomorskaInstitute of Psychology, University of Lodz, Poland.
Paweł OstaszewskiInstitute of Psychology, SWPS University, Warsaw, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To illustrate the processes of development within the behavioral theory and the corresponding expansion of the areas in which it is applied, especially the advancement (conceptual developments) of the functional analysis of language inspired by Relational Frame Theory (RFT) research. Views: Classical and operant conditioning are well-established behavioral learning processes, discovered and described at the beginning of the twentieth century. They provide the tools for analyzing, establishing and modifying the functions of stimuli and responses of the organisms through manipulation of the environment. Although B. F. Skinner provided grounds for the functional analysis of complex behaviors such as language, it was not until the beginning of the twenty-first century that RFT was introduced. From this moment behavior analysts could use behavioral principles to explain how stimulus functions may change without direct learning. The practical application of the growing knowledge about Arbitrarily Applicable Relational Responding (AARR), a basic generalized operant described within RFT, allows us to analyze, explain and change behaviors that had hitherto been beyond the scope of behavioral therapy. The continued growth and development of behavior theory and practice holds the promise for an expansion of its application to new areas and populations in need. One such development is the functional analysis of verbal behavior e.g., relational frames, ROE (relating-orienting-evoking). Conclusions: It seems useful to add advancements proposed by RFT to the behavioral toolbox with which we could effectively describe, explain and change behavior with precision, scope and depth.

Indexed as

applied behavior analysisbehavior therapyfunctional analysis of languagerelational frame theory

Identifiers

PMID38559605
PMCPMC10976621

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.