Editor's note: The power of big ideas

Reviewing manuscripts for behavior-analytic journals: A primer

The peer-review component of the editorial process is designed to facilitate quality control, legitimize scientific research, and self-regulate scientific communities. Even though serving as a reviewer undoubtedly has direct and indirect benefits, the peer-review system and the methods of teaching scholars to conduct reviews are nascent and relatively underdeveloped. This article describes the peer-review process and provides recommendations for writing reviews for scientific journals. The recommendations were developed based on the expertise and preferences of editors in chief and associate editors for behavior-analytic journals (Cengher & LeBlanc, 2024), and they include honoring your responsibility, knowing your audience, being constructive and kind, and carefully evaluating the merits of the study or review. These guidelines may serve as a primer for scholars who want to conduct reviews for scientific journals in behavior analysis.

Rethinking the Place of Qualitative Methods in Behavior Analysis

Single-case design research is pervasive and dominant in the field of behavior analysis (BA). It allows for effective application of behavior change technologies in a wide variety of real-world settings. However, as the field has grown, behavioral scholars have suggested incorporating other methods into the investigator’s toolbox to supplement single-case design. To date, the call to expand beyond using only variations of single-case design as the standard for behavior analytic research has gone largely unheard. Given the need for behavior analytic work to be more closely aligned with consumer and stakeholder needs and priorities, along with a proliferation of practitioners and researchers in the field, now is the time to consider the benefits of qualitative research methods for behavior analysts. In particular, in areas of social validity and in exploring diverse applied topics, qualitative methods may help the field of behavior analysis to achieve greater success with documenting the outcomes from behavior change interventions. The present article explores areas where behavior analysis may benefit from utilizing qualitative methods, namely social validity and breadth of topics for study, and provides examples of the value of qualitative research from other fields. A brief outline of qualitative research is provided alongside consideration of the seven dimensions of applied behavior analysis. In situations where single-case design does not offer behavior analysts sufficient methodological opportunity, qualitative research methods could form a powerful addition to the field of behavior analysis.

Structured visual analysis of single-case experimental design data: Developments and technological advancements

Visual analysis is the primary method used to interpret single-case experimental design (SCED) data in applied behavior analysis. Research shows that agreement between visual analysts can be suboptimal at times. To address the inconsistent interpretations of SCED data, recent structured visual-analysis technological advancements have been developed. To assess the extent to which structured visual analysis is used to guide or supplement applied behavior analysts' interpretation of SCED graphs, a systematic review between the years of 2015 to 2020 in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis was conducted. Findings showed that despite recent efforts to develop structured visual-analysis tools and criteria, these methods are rarely used to analyze SCED data. An overview of structured visual-analysis tools is shared, their utility is delineated, common characteristics are brought to light, and future directions for both research and their clinical use are highlighted.

ABA Finding Its Heart During a Pandemic: An Exploration in Social Validity

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented practitioners of applied behavior analysis (ABA) with new and uncharted challenges. Upholding ethical responsibilities while navigating an international public health crisis has opened areas of uncertainty that have no precedent. Although there is general guidance on how to respond ethically from the Behavior Analyst Certification Board (BACB) in their publication specific to the COVID-19 crisis (BACB, 2020, March 29, Ethics Guidance for ABA Providers During COVID-19 Pandemic, retrieved from https://www.bacb.com/ethics-guidance-for-aba-providers-during-covid-19-pandemic-2/), there remains a huge responsibility on the individual practitioner to make potentially life-changing decisions. In that regard, practitioners are urged to ensure that they rely on socially significant and valid decision-making processes. The goal of this article is to provide an exercise in accounting for stakeholder feedback and connecting with patients and families regarding their input on the acceptability of treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. The exercise is in the form of a structured parent interview to help practitioners account for the setting variables and social validity of treatment during a crisis. It is our ethical responsibility to remember this critical dimension of our science and practice.