ReviewPerspectives on behavior science2024
A Call to Investigate and Improve the Research Literacy of Professional Behavior Analysts.
Review in Perspectives on behavior science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Are Keynote and Invited Speakers at State Behavior Analytic Conferences Experts on Their Presentation Topics?Behavior analysis in practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The effectiveness of behavior-analytic service delivery is likely to depend in part on the process of applying knowledge from the laboratory to a service setting. Therefore, a regular review of the literature is an important part of effective practice. It has been proposed that a review of the literature is one of the pillars of evidence-based practice in applied behavior analysis. An effective review of the literature requires five distinct research literacy skills: (1) efficiently finding relevant research investigations or discussions; (2) accessing a full text copy; (3) reading and evaluating; (4) applying what was read to practice; and (5) staying current. In this paper we apply the Six Boxes Model to delineate behavioral influences and possible barriers to research literacy, suggest potential interventions to improve the research literacy of professional behavior analysts, and identify potential research opportunities in this area.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.