ArticlePerspectives on behavior science2025
Social Validity and Contemporary Applied Behavior Analysis.
Article in Perspectives on behavior science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the Effects of Skill-Based Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Single-Case Studies.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2026Article
- A Tactful Prompt: The Time is Right forPerspectives on behavior science · 2025Review
- A concise review of social validity assessments during functional analyses of challenging behavior.Journal of applied behavior analysisReview
- Social validity as an interactive process.Journal of applied behavior analysisReview
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
For behavior analysts, social validity should be a standard and evolving component of our own self-evaluation process. Our field has known that for decades, but we have not always been good about implementing such self-evaluations. Recent criticism of our field should be viewed as setting the occasion for self-reflection and improvement of our practices. To accomplish those aims (self-relection and improvement), we need to identify specific practices to extinguish, modify, or (at least) explain better. We will address this challenge in three contexts. First, we provide discussion on what is "meant" by "ABA." Second, we distinguish between ABA as a discipline and ABA as an intervention (we contend it is the former and not the latter). Third, we acknowledge and identify nuances of social validation, often by drawing parallels and comparisons to medical fields.
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.