Table 1.

Each of the six “behavior-analytic” articles analyzed in terms of the seven dimensions of ABA (Baer et al., 1968, 1987)

	Bowman (1996)	Millichap et al. (2003)	Feliciano, Vore, LeBlanc, and Baker (2004)	Horovitz, Kozlowski, and Matson (2010)	Vogl and Rapp (2011)	Crook, Adams, Shorten, and Langdon (2016)
Applied	Yes: Participant walked off campus and onto public roads with traffic and the intervention reduced the frequency of the behavior.	Unclear: Purpose was to determine whether there was a functional relationship between social events and behavioral excesses in individuals with Down syndrome and dementia.	Yes: Purpose was to decrease wandering into an area that was restricted due to hazards.	Yes: Target behavior was noncompliance to getting dressed.	Yes: Intervention reduced inappropriate loitering and stealing in the day facility the participant attended.	Unclear: Randomized case series design to determine whether rummage boxes or life story books improved well-being. Did not aim to change behavior.
Behavioral	Unclear: No description of the data-collection methods.	Yes: There was direct observation of target behaviors, and the behaviors of interest were operationally defined.	Yes: There was direct observation of target behaviors, and the behaviors of interest were operationally defined.	Unclear: Data collection unclear (e.g., frequency recorded on “standard behavioral report forms” and not stated whether recorded in situ or post hoc). Some description of topography.	Yes: Direct observation data collected on two behaviors, both operationally defined.	Unclear: DCM was the data-collection method and “well-being” was not objectively defined.
Analytic	Unclear: Baseline was brief (one data point showing instances in 1 month), and data for the withdrawal were anecdotal; therefore, no strong evidence of a functional relationship.	Unclear: Used conditional probabilities that demonstrated correlational rather than functional relationships between the target behaviors and environment.	Yes: An ABABCB design was used, demonstrating a functional relationship between the intervention and decrease in behavior.	No: AB design and therefore no clear demonstration of a functional relationship.	No: AB design and therefore no clear demonstration of a functional relationship.	Yes: Alternating treatments design.
Technological	Yes: Methods described in enough detail for replication.	Yes: Methods described in enough detail for replication.	Yes: Methods described in enough detail for replication.	Unclear: Methods partially described, but procedure was changed and changes not described.	Yes: Methods described in enough detail for replication.	Yes: Methods described in enough detail for replication.
Conceptually systematic	Yes: Behavioral principles identified included reinforcers, variable interval schedules, etc.	Yes: Findings described in relation to possible reinforcers, establishing operations, antecedents, etc.	Yes: Conceptual systems underpinning behavior change discussed.	Unclear: Not explained in behavior-analytic terms (e.g., hypothesized function was “confusion regarding what was expected of him”).	Yes: Behaviors analyzed in terms of hypothesized reinforcers.	No: Underlying behavioral principles not identified.
Effective	Yes: Behavior reduced to zero.	N/A: Conditional probabilities used.	Yes: Decrease in both approaches and entering during intervention.	Yes: Downward trend in intervention phase.	Yes: Reduction in target behavior during intervention phase.	Unclear: No intervention as such. Data showed an intervention was better than none, but that no intervention was better than any other.
Generality	Yes: Behavior reemerged 6 months later (4 months after the intervention).	N/A: Conditional probabilities used.	Yes: Stimulus size faded systematically, and color changed.	Yes: Data reported after 1 month.	Yes: Behavior maintained at 2- and 3-month follow-up probes.	No: No data collected.