Association for Behavior Analysis International

Since the 1980s, Organizational Behavior Management (OBM) and Performance Management (PM) methodologies have been introduced and spread in Italy. Fabio Tosolin has been at the forefront of this dissemination. In the 1990s, he began to apply O. Lindsley’s Precision Teaching and Fluency Building Approach to e-learning and introduced Behavior-Based Safety process (B-BS) in Italy. Since 1985, he has led the Milan-based management consulting firm, Fabio Tosolin & Associates, which deals with Performance Management, learning technologies and behavioral safety for many national and multinational companies. This talk will highlight the role leadership networks and decision making play in the process of large-scale dissemination of behavior analysis across sectors of Italy.

Forthcoming

The roots of behavior analysis are found on empirical philosophers, on Pavlov, Pieron, and other thinkers. However, during the larger part of its history behavior analysis has been a discipline cultivated mainly in the United States and other English-speaking countries. The pioneers of behavior analysis as an area of research were part of the Anglo-Saxon culture (Watson, Skinner, and Baum) and was also the case with applied workers (Wolpe, Eysenck, Rachman, Keller, and Azrin). Probably the philosophical assumptions of the Anglo-Saxon culture were in tune with behavior analysis as a science and applied area. On the other hand, during the past few decades, an internationalization of behavior analysis has taken place. Work of high quality is carried out in Norway, Japan, Spain, Brazil, and other nations. The situation of behavior analysis and its international growth is analyzed, including the role of the Association for Behavior Analysis International in this process. At the present time, behavior analysts are "thinking globally and acting locally."

Psychologists, behavior analysts, graduate students and anyone interested in learning about the international growth of behavior analysis.

More traditional computer simulations of human behavior have involved information processing models of the brain, whereby the brain is assumed to be modeled after the way computers are architected: lots of data stored in memory with programs that retrieve the data given certain inputs. Adaptive network systems are elemental computer learning programs that have enabled the simulation of behavior at an operant level, whereby that behavior which is followed by reinforcing consequences is more likely to occur again. This symposium explores how adaptive networks can generate simple verbal operants, and how more diverse and complex behavior can then be generated as a result. Implications for the interpretation of more complex human linguistic behavior and the development of effective teaching programs also are considered.

Psychologists, behavior analysts, and graduate students interested in exploring how adaptive networks can generate simple verbal operants, and how more diverse and complex behavior can then be generated as a result.

Adaptive networks are in essence, computer programs that learn. This very fact places them squarely in the domain of behavior analysis, although few in the field conduct research with them, or develop them for commercial or other purposes. This talk will provide an overview of what Adaptive Network Systems (ANS) are and how they differ from typical computer programs; provide insight into how they work; and show how they can adhere to the behavioral principles that the experimental analysis of behavior has uncovered over the years. The basic components of such a network will be explored including the architecture, some simple learning algorithms, and design features which preclude hard-wiring responses, or using brute computer power to solve problems or to produce more complex behaviors. Finally, some simple examples of ANS will be illustrated, particularly related to the elementary verbal operants.

Because the experimental analysis of verbal behavior is constrained by practical and ethical considerations, most of our understanding of complex cases arises from verbal interpretations. But such interpretations are limited by the sheer number of relevant variables and our ignorance of subjects' histories. In contrast, adaptive network simulations permit complete control over both complex contextual variables and historical variables. If such simulations are tightly constrained by behavioral principles, they offer powerful demonstrations of the explanatory adequacy of such principles. Dr. Palmer will discuss several examples that seem to defy verbal interpretation, examples such as the problems of novelty, nesting, generalization of neologisms according to apparent grammatical form, conditioning the behavior of the listener, mysterious structural regularities in verbal behavior, and the problem of acquisition of complex forms. He will suggest that adaptive network simulations of verbal behavior may be the best interpretive tool and in some cases the only one.

The presentation will describe a robot whose behavior is learned via an adaptive network based on behavior analytic principles, embedded in a body with sensors including vision and hearing and with responses including spatial movements and vocalizations. The demonstration will first show how that robot learns elementary verbal operants, then more complex verbal behaviors based on them. We will examine in detail how some of the puzzling verbal behaviors described in the preceding papers in the symposium are learned, illustrating how using a robot makes it possible to examine moment-to-moment changes in the conditions that control the behavioral sequence.

Throughout history and more recently, countless people have changed the world in significant ways. They forged new paths and demonstrated a remarkable ability to inspire others to follow. Margaret Mead suggested: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” Was she right that the actions of not one but a few individuals under special motivating circumstances are what account for profound change? Or is it the case that leaders possess incomparable and unique repertoires that enable them to affect change single-handedly? Are there common traits and systems-based strategies that effective leaders use to bring about change? As behavior analysts, we must reflect on these questions and wonder if our scientific approach can account for the change.

Psychologists, behavior analysts, graduate students, and anyone interested in leadership and the science of behavior change.

Despite more than 60 years of published information clearly showing that null-hypothesis significance tests (NHSTs) and the p values associated with them provide essentially no information about the reliability (i.e., probability of replication) of research outcomes, they remain at the core of editorial decision-making in the behavioral sciences, including psychology, with statistical significance serving as the major gateway to publication of research results. Two reasons appear to contribute to the continuing practice. One, information available suggests that a majority of psychological researchers incorrectly believe that p values do provide information about the reliability of research results. Two, among the minority thatare aware that p values do no such thing, a position sometimes taken is that even though p values do not provide the information many think they do, using them to make decisions about whether to believe in research results is and has been essentially benign. This paper addresses both reasons. Because the first has been pointed out many times, it is briefly covered, because of the apparent persistence of the misunderstanding. The second, that NHSTs have no significant negative effects on behavioral sciences, is the focus of the major portion of the paper, which describes seven “side-effects” of NHSTs that continue to retard effective development of psychological science. The paper makes an appeal to journal reviewers and editors to de-emphasize or eliminate the role of NHSTs, and it closes by offering a few suggestions about alternatives that could be considered and with a challenge to psychological researchers to develop new methods that more fully assess the reliability and generality of research findings.

Anyone interested in data-analysis techniques.

Automatic reinforcement is a controversial topic. Skinner (1957) described automatic contingencies in Verbal Behavior as an important concept relative to complex human behavior. However, empirical evidence relative to the existence of automatically reinforced behavior is scant. Vaughan and Michael (1982) described automatic reinforcement as referring to three types of functional relations and practitioners have operated on the assumption that automatic reinforcement, as in producing sensory consequences, provides a helpful context for crafting more effective intervention. However, problem behavior that is automatically reinforced is thought to be persistent and challenging to alter across the lifespan. This presentation will explore whether automatic reinforcement actually provides a useful account of behavior that clearly offers pragmatic value to behavior analysis and its successful application. Whether behavior, referred to as automatically reinforced, is operant, respondent, or adjunctive in nature also will be discussed.

Anyone interested in autism and behavior analysis.

The field of behavior analysis and related disciplines offer much to promote behavioral solutions to socially significant practices. How our discipline is led and becomes more influential is a challenge we can apply our science toward. By drawing upon their pioneering work in behavior science, panelists will provide comments regarding this theme of the Seminar on Leadership and Cultural Change. The seminar is designed tohelp educational leaders to create new models of stewardship and open opportunities for innovation while adjusting to growing social upheaval, technological advances, and environmental concerns, as well as crises in the global economy, health, education, and environment. It will address how behavior analysis finds common ground with other sciences by investigating the behavior of leaders who influence organizations and society.

Psychologists, behavior analysts, graduate students, and anyone interested in the future of behavior analysis.

The term "evidence-based practice" now appears in the professional literature of every discipline that attempts to change human behavior in some dimension (e.g., health, social, communication, etc.). In recent years, behavior analysts have begun discussing the role of evidence-based practice within our field. Differing views about the definition of "evidence-based practice of ABA" have been raised as well as the question of how the evidence-based practice of ABA should influence practitioners. This presentation invites leading scholars within ABA to define evidence-based practice and to discuss the implications of their definition on the practice of behavior analysis. By answering questions like "What is a practice?" "What constitutes evidence?" and "How should the evidence-based practice of ABA influence practitioners' decision-making in their daily work?", Tim Slocum and Tristram Smith will demonstrate that the answers are essential to our field but more murky than they appear on face value. In addition, they will identify the role researchers must play if an evidence-based practice of ABA is to be realized in a meaningful way. They conclude by providing recommendations about how we should proceed as practitioners, researchers, and as a field if we expect to fully adopt the evidence-based practice of ABA.

The primary target audience is practitioners who are required to make decisions regarding evidence-based practice as a part of their daily work. A secondary audience is researchers who conduct research and/or submit for federal funding in this area.

Dr. Slocum will suggest that evidence-based practice of behavior analysis (EBP-BA) be defined as a decision-making process that integrates (A) the best available evidence with (B) clinical expertise and (C) client values and context. This definition corresponds with definitions of EBP in other professions including medicine and psychology, supports the foundational principles of applied behavior analysis, and provides a framework that can be applied to virtually all of one's professional practice as a behavior analyst. In this definition, behavior analysts' practices are understood to encompass all of their professional behavior. It states that behavior analytic practice should be based on the best available evidence. The quality, volume, and relevance of evidence varies greatly across the decisions that behavior analysts make--what is constant is that behavior analysts should seek out and use the best of what is available. This approach to EBP-BA suggests that ABA researchers (A) advance best available evidence through primary intervention research, (B) investigate how clinical expertise, client values, and context can be most effectively integrated into professional decision making, and (C) develop ways to make the best available evidence functionally accessible to practitioners.

Although behavior analysts often say we engage in evidence-based practice, we express differing, sometimes contradictory views on what constitutes "evidence" and "practice." In order to provide useful guidance to consumers, providers, third-party payers, and researchers, we need to be clear on what is or is not a practice and what is or is not suitable evidence. This talk will critique applied behavior analytic interventions that behavior analysts have identified as evidence-based practices. It argues that establishing such practices involves more than analyzing the effects of discrete intervention procedures on behavior; it requires synthesizing findings into a package that is demonstrably usable by independent providers and useful to consumers. Recognizing the need for synthesis offers behavior analysts many promising opportunities to build on our existing research in order to increase the quality and quantity of evidence-based practices.

This talk will present a brief history of the Applied Behavior Analysis Program at the National Changhua University of Education (NCUE) in Taiwan. Taiwan has actively promoted applied behavior analysis and its application for more than 10 years. The graduate program, which offers board certification in behavior analysis, has been approved by the Behavior Analysis Certification Board since 2006. In 2011, a clinical center, which was based on behavior analytic principles, was established. Teachers who are trained in this center have contributed greatly to raising the awareness and profile of applied behavior analysis in academic circles in Taiwan. The students and professors at NCUE have contributed research findings in a number of important areas including verbal behavior, pretend play, joint attention, self-management skills, perspective-taking, and emotional skills training. Staff and students at the clinical center have developed training protocols and comprehensive assessment tools to assist them with the provision of evidence-based instruction for children with autism. Special education and rehabilitation teachers have the opportunity to access in-service training and practicum opportunities through the clinical center. Research findings suggest that these opportunities have had a favorable impact on the education system in Taiwan. Future development plans and proposed research also will be discussed as a part of this talk.

Obtaining research funding is a critical part of most research careers. A number of funding avenues are available to basic and applied behavior analysts. The speakers in this symposium are individuals with successful records of obtaining funding from a variety of sources such as the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the Federal Aviation Administration, and other sources and individuals who serve as program officers at the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation. Each speaker will provide their perspective on strategies for success in obtaining funding.

Basic and applied behavior analysts interested in obtaining federal funding for research.

Funding behavior analysis research through the National Institutes of Health can be difficult. The challenge is not just about the shrinking available dollars. The more important difficulty is the NIH emphasis on clinically relevant research and the need to demonstrate that behavioral research will translate into improved treatment for a clinical disorder. Much important behavior research has little to do with clinical disorders but is about understanding the behavior of average people: how they make decisions that affect the economy, the environment, the safety of transportation and industry, and the functioning of communities. Solving behavioral problems in these domains are every bit as important as contributing to health care, so how does such research get funded? In this talk, Dr. Hursh will illustrate several strategies for successful research funding, using his experience as a case study. In particular, nearly all his research has been funded from sources other than NIH. Alternative funding requires a shift from being a behavior analyst to being a problem analyst, applying behavioral solutions.

This presentation will convey perspectives on the process of preparing competitive grant applications for peer review. For more than 30 years, Dr. McIlvane has been writing applications to various federal funding agencies, most of which have been successful. He also has served on dozens of advisory panels that have reviewed grant applications or made recommendations about funding priorities and procedures. In his current position, he serves as principal investigator on five active National Institutes of Health grants. He also mentors colleagues in the process of preparing competitive grant applications. Through his combined experiences, he has come to understand quite a bit about the variables that determine whether or not grant applications are successful. Because he serves in multiple roles (i.e., principal investigator, reviewer, mentor, and research administrator), he will convey multiple perspectives that may help behavior analysts understand the overall context within which grant applications are successful (or not). Also, he will discuss strategies and tactics for operating research programs within tight budgetary constraints such as those faced currently by researchers nationwide.

Behavioral research is critically important to NIH’s mission not only at the NIH institutes that have responsibility for behavioral disorders, but also because behavior has a pervasive effect on most health outcomes. Topics that will be covered in this talk include an overview of NIH-wide initiatives in behavioral research, such as the Science of Behavioral Change (SOBC) and the Basic Behavioral and Social Science Opportunity Network (OppNet), and the funding priorities in behavioral research of the National Institute on Drug Abuse and other NIH Institutes. Strategies for finding the best home for your research at NIH also will be presented.

The National Science Foundation funds basic and applied research in many areas of interest to behavior analysts. In general, funded research advances theory and has substantial broader impacts beyond the results of the research itself. This presentation reviews the proposal and review process including the criteria of intellectual merit and broader impact, highlights opportunities in Decision, Risk & Management Sciences, and describesthree funding mechanisms that may be of special interest: dissertation improvement grants for doctoral students; CAREER grants for early-career behavioral scientists; and research in undergraduate institutions (RUI) grants for faculty at undergraduate colleges and universities.

Treatments for pediatric feeding disorders based on applied behavior analysis have the most empirical support in the literature, even though the results of several studies have shown that the etiology of pediatric feeding disorders is often complex and multifactorial. Factors that contribute to the etiology of a feeding disorder include medical problems, oral-motor dysfunction, and nutritional and/or caloric deficits. Therefore, it is critical that the behavior analyst seek input from physicians, speech and/or occupational therapists, and dietitians before initiating treatment of a child with a feeding disorder. The first purpose of this presentation is to familiarize the audience with the potential risks associated with treatment of a pediatric feeding disorder. A second purpose is to teach the audience ways to mitigate these risks. A third purpose is to teach the audience why interaction with professionals from other disciplines is important for safe and effective treatment of a child with a feeding disorder.

From dawn to dusk, psychology affects every aspect of our lives. For example, success in educational settings, at the workplace, on the athletic field, and at home is influenced dramatically by interpersonal and intrapersonal leadership. Are teachers facilitating motivation and learning among their students? Do supervisors empower workers to go beyond the call of duty to achieve organizational goals? Do coaches bring the best out of their players by enhancing self-motivation and cultivating interdependent teamwork? Do parents discipline their children so undesirable behaviors are not only eliminated but desirable behaviors and attitudes are promoted? This presentation will offer research-based principles and techniques teachers, coaches, supervisors, and parents can use to instruct and inspire others to perform at optimum levels of effectiveness. This is transformational leadership. Within this context, the vision of an Actively Caring for People Movement will be introduced--large-scale applications of behavioral science and leadership principles to cultivate cultures of compassion worldwide, thereby preventing interpersonal conflict, bullying, and violence.

Psychologists, behavior analysts, graduate students, and anyone interested in instructing and inspiring others to perform at optimum levels of effectiveness.

Many behavior analysts have shown keen interest in how an animal’s genetic endowment interacts with environmental variables to evoke and elicit responses and how these responses and associated consequences affect future responses and produce changes in organism variables. Throughout the years, great progress has been made in understanding biobehavioral interactions. However, our progress in understanding these complex interactions could be accelerated if more behavior analysts participated in transdisciplinary research teams that function as “think tanks” to develop studies that answer questions that could not be addressed by single-discipline research. The focus of this talk will be on (1) the potential benefits of incorporating indirect measures of behavior to document patterns of behavior within specific genetic disorders prior to costly large-scale direct observation studies, and (2) how technological advances such a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) can expand our range of dependent variables to facilitate our understanding of how organism variables interact with environmental variables. Specifically, this talk will describe Dr. Richmond’s research on phenotypic expression of Cornelia de Lange Syndrome and Autism Spectrum Disorder that has incorporated parental report or fMRI dependent variables.