Dataset Information

Behavior analytic jargon does not seem to influence treatment acceptability ratings.

ABSTRACT: Some have argued that behavior analysts have insulated themselves by eschewing the vernacular and adopting idiosyncratic and sometimes counterintuitive technical terms to describe their science and practice. Because of this, behavior analysis plays a minor role in psychology and related fields and effective behavior-change interventions go unused. All told, findings about the effects of behavior-analytic jargon are mixed. Studies that provided technical terms independent of context have produced unfavorable results, whereas studies that have provided context have produced positive or neutral results, overall. This study evaluated the effects of behavioral jargon on the acceptability ratings of several applied behavior analysis interventions described in terms of varying target behaviors, populations, and settings. We presented brief vignettes adapted from published research articles that were described in either jargon or nonjargon versions. There were no appreciable differences in the rated acceptability of interventions described with or without jargon.

SUBMITTER: Normand MP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9826085 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Behavior analytic jargon does not seem to influence treatment acceptability ratings.

Normand Matthew P MP Donohue Hailey E HE

Journal of applied behavior analysis 20220921 4

Some have argued that behavior analysts have insulated themselves by eschewing the vernacular and adopting idiosyncratic and sometimes counterintuitive technical terms to describe their science and practice. Because of this, behavior analysis plays a minor role in psychology and related fields and effective behavior-change interventions go unused. All told, findings about the effects of behavior-analytic jargon are mixed. Studies that provided technical terms independent of context have produced ...[more]

PMID: 36131368

Similar Datasets

Project description:Anemia is a continuing global public health concern and a priority for international action. The prevalence of anemia is estimated from the hemoglobin (Hb) levels within target populations, yet the procedures for measuring Hb are not standardized and different approaches may result in discrepancies. Several analytical variables have been proposed to influence Hb measurements, but it is difficult to understand the impact on specific variables from large population or field studies. Therefore, we designed a highly controlled protocol that minimized most technical parameters to specifically investigate the impact of blood draw site and analytic device on Hb measurements. A diverse cohort of sixty healthy adults each provided a sequential capillary and venous blood sample that were measured for Hb using an automated hematology analyzer (ADVIA-2120) and two point-of-care devices (HemoCue 201+ and HemoCue 301). Comparing blood draw sites, the mean Hb content was 0.32–0.47 g/dL (2–4%) higher in capillary compared to venous blood from the same donors. Comparing different Hb measuring instruments, the mean Hb content was 0.19–0.46 g/dL (1–4%) higher measured with HemoCue devices compared to ADVIA-2120 in both capillary and venous blood from the same donors. The maximum variance in measurement was also higher with HemoCue devices using blood from venous (5–6% CV) and capillary (21–25% CV) sites compared to ADVIA-2120 (0.6–2% CV). Other variables including blood collection tube manufacturer did not affect mean Hb content. These results demonstrate that even when most technical variables are minimized, the blood draw site and the analytical device can have a small but statistically significant effect on the mean and dispersion of Hb measurements. Even in this study, the few participants identified as mildly anemic using venous blood measured by ADVIA-2120 would not have been classified as anemic using their capillary blood samples or point-of-care analyzers. Thus, caution is warranted when comparing Hb values between studies having differences in blood draw site and Hb measuring device. Future anemia testing should maintain consistency in these analytical variables.

Dataset Information

Behavior analytic jargon does not seem to influence treatment acceptability ratings.

Publications

Behavior analytic jargon does not seem to influence treatment acceptability ratings.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets