Values: A Core Guiding Principle for Behavior-Analytic Intervention and Research

Abstract

Values represent qualities or beliefs that are of high priority to individuals or society and represent one of the core processes within acceptance and commitment therapy or training (ACT or ACTr). The current article discusses values and valuing not only as a centralized process in ACT but also as a core process guiding the field of applied behavior analysis with applications that extend across several intervention domains. A relational frame theory model of values as hierarchical frames that augment reinforcing functions that can influence socially meaningful behavior change is reviewed. This basic model is then extended to encompass temporal, deictic, and causal frames. Values-based intervention research is emerging in areas such as guided decision making, professional development, organizational behavior management, parent training, and treatment plans for children and adults. Although this research is promising, more work is needed to further explore the role of values and valuing within ACT, and when they are used within other intervention strategies. Several potential avenues for future research that may aid in the development of values-based intervention by behavior analysts and extend the scope of our field and practice are discussed.

In a general sense, values are those qualities or beliefs that are of high priority to an individual or a community. Values are a target of much philosophical and empirical attention in several academic and professional disciplines, and the concept of values has been cited as “able to unify the apparently diverse interests of all the sciences concerned with human behavior” (Rokeach, 1973, p. 3). In the context of applied behavior analysis (ABA), the concept of values and interventions that target values consistent with an acceptance and commitment therapy or training (ACT or ACTr; ACT will be used as the general acronym) approach may have utility in several key areas of research and practice, from professional development to individual treatment plans. A seemingly agreed-upon notion among those in the field of ABA is a focus on the acceleration or deceleration of socially important behaviors within a framework of techniques, practices, and procedures that, within context and to a reasonable extent, are applied, behavioral, analytic, conceptually systematic, technological, effective, and generalizable (e.g., Baer et al., 1968). Discussions of the relationship between an ACT approach and these “seven dimensions” of ABA in general have been presented, for example, by Tarbox et al. (2020) and Dixon et al. (2020); however, the emphasis on socially important behavior seems critical when considering the role of values in behavior analysis.

A glance at the terms “socially important” and “values” or “valued outcomes” might leave a reader thinking, “These are related or even synonymous ideas.” This highlights one end of the spectrum of the relevance of values-based approaches in behavior-analytic work: The use of values to guide action to produce meaningful changes in behavior is arguably the core of ACT-based interventions (Wilson & Murrell, 2004; Wilson & Sandoz, 2008) and may be useful in areas of ABA such as professional development, decision making in research or practice, or treatment plan development. Equally important, however, is the role of “valuing” as a behavior (Dahl, 2015; Dahl et al., 2009). Interventions designed to increase behaviors that produce socially, or personally, important outcomes may have utility in common areas of behavior-analytic intervention, such as staff training, parent training, and intervention for individuals with a variety of behavioral deficits or excesses. The purpose of the present discussion is to review the theoretical and conceptual foundations of values, the current empirical literature related to values in behavior analysis, and the role of values within the ACT approach, highlighting areas of utility within the practice of behavior analysis. The information and relevant implications for research and practice discussed are intended to be informative, but not exhaustive given the wealth of existing literature in this area, and to provide practitioners and researchers with avenues for further exploration related to values in their work.

Skinner (1971) described valuing as the discrimination between a thing and its reinforcing effect, suggesting that “a science of values” is one that examines the history of an individual and their current context to determine what behaviors are likely to occasion reinforcement (p. 103). Consistent with this view, Leigland (2005) described values as “a function of certain variables found in environment-behavior interactions” and elaborated further regarding the role of motivating operations and verbal behavior in this analysis (p. 134). As described by Tarbox et al. (2020), values can be considered rule statements that function as verbal motivating operations, increasing the likelihood of overt behaviors that produce the specified reinforcers. For example, the statement “I value being an effective behavior analyst” describes the establishment of good treatment outcomes for clients as a reinforcer. In this instance, being an “effective behavior analyst” is defined as completing assessments and interventions that result in client attainment of treatment goals and targets; examples of behaviors that produce these outcomes include, for example, conducting valid assessments, developing function-based behavior interventions, and maintaining treatment fidelity throughout implementation. The definition and account of values have been refined to emphasize the role of verbally established motivation and to provide a more functional interpretation. This has led to an increase in basic and applied values work in areas such as clinical behavior analysis, particularly within ACT, as described by Plumb et al. (2009).

Clinical and Theoretical Conceptualizations of Values

The description of values in the context of intervention with clients and the theoretical conceptualization of values from a behavior-analytic perspective use distinct terms suited to the audience (i.e., clients or professionals). In clinical work, values are often defined as “freely chosen concepts linked with patterns of action that provide a sense of meaning and that can coordinate our behaviour over long time frames” (Dahl, 2015, p. 43). Stated differently, values represent intangible outcomes of purposive action that are meaningful to the individual. This description highlights several key aspects of clients’ interactions with this core process, which have been illustrated by several authors (e.g., Dahl, 2015; S. C. Hayes et al., 2011). The concept of “freely chosen” values indicates that the values held represent the preferred reinforcers specific to the individual, rather than those that are entirely “expected by” or “defined by” others and not important to the individual. The reference to “patterns of action” indicates the ongoing nature of behavior that produces high-value reinforcement as opposed to a terminal attainment of values-related outcomes. This sentiment is often highlighted by the phrase “values are not goals,” which creates a distinction between values as qualities of action or sources of reinforcement that can be experienced momentarily and goals as “concrete, object-like consequences of action that can be obtained or finished” (Chase et al., 2013, p. 79). The phrase “a sense of meaning” highlights again the importance of the social validity of the identified values to the individual, as well as the highly verbal nature of values (which will be described in more depth later in this discussion). Reference to the coordination of behavior over time suggests the dual function of values as both the “guide” of action and a measure by which to evaluate outcomes (values–behavior coherence). To return to the example behavior analyst who values being effective as a professional, engaging in behaviors at work that successfully support clients provides a sense of meaning, fulfillment, and purpose that both directs and maintains their actions. Although it is important that professionals become “fluent” in the terminology used to discuss values with clients and their caregivers, to maintain the behavior-analytic implementation of these techniques within practice, it is equally necessary to be able to describe values in terms of relevant behavioral processes.

A similar definition of values has been presented that provides a metaphorical “bridge” between the way in which values are presented to and interacted with by an individual participating in an intervention and the theoretical foundation rooted in relational frame theory (RFT): “Values are freely chosen, verbally constructed consequences of ongoing, dynamic, evolving patterns of activity, which establish predominant reinforcers for that activity that are intrinsic in engagement in the valued behavioral pattern itself” (Wilson & DuFrene, 2009, p. 66). This statement presents values as identified sources of reinforcement, which have been abstracted to verbal descriptions of these classes of reinforcers. It might be useful to think of values statements as a shorthand of sorts describing those contingencies that produce high-value reinforcers. Returning to our example behavior analyst, the statement “I value being an effective behavior analyst” describes a context in which the contingencies that produce good client outcomes as reinforcers are those that would be adaptive controlling stimuli for the behavior analyst’s behavior. This would allow the behavior analyst to maximize contact with those reinforcers through direct contingency, as well as the “intrinsic” reinforcement experienced because of the coherence between the stated value and the overt action. This description of values in terms of behavior patterns and values-based contingencies of reinforcement is a critical component of a complete analysis; however, it is necessary to further explore how those values statements come to function as rule statements that act as verbal motivating operations.

A theoretical interpretation of values rooted in RFT is inclusive of hierarchical relational responding and rule-governed behavior and provides a conceptually consistent account that coheres with the more clinically oriented description of this concept. As previously noted, Skinner (1971) addressed the concept of values, and this interpretation has been expanded since that time. The RFT-oriented account that follows, which has been presented by Plumb et al. (2009), provides perhaps the most thorough and useful treatment of values for practitioners in ABA. A description of basic concepts within RFT and a general overview of rule-governed behavior are beyond the scope of the present discussion; however, familiarity with these concepts is recommended (for a review of RFT, see Blackledge, 2003; see also S. C. Hayes et al., 2001; for a related review of rule-governed behavior, see Harte et al., 2020). As previously stated, values can be interpreted as abstract verbal stimuli; as described by Plumb et al., the establishment of these verbal relations can be viewed as hierarchical (categorical) relational responding, as presented in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Example Hierarchical Relational Network Related to Values (Left) and Summary of Transformation of Stimulus Function and Effect of Motivative Augment (Right). Note. IOA = interobserver agreement.

Hierarchical relational responding refers to classes of stimuli that are related in higher order classes in terms of categorization or attribution (S. C. Hayes et al., 2001). In this interpretation, values become hierarchically related to goals and specific actions. For example, Fig. 1 (left) presents a possible relational network consistent with the example behavior analyst whose values include being an “effective behavior analyst.” Perhaps two components of their performance that can be improved are the validity of the assessments they conduct and the accurate implementation of behavior intervention plans. This individual may set goals for their performance such as “conduct valid assessments” and “implement high-quality behavior plans.” Actions such as attending relevant workshops, collecting interobserver agreement data during assessments, and developing treatment fidelity checklists to monitor implementation may support the achievement of the stated goals. Here, the verbal stimulus “effective behavior analyst” specifies the reinforcing effect and becomes hierarchically related to relevant goals and actions that are likely to produce this effect.

If the individual’s responding is consistent with this hierarchical relational network, the transformation of stimulus function within this network may influence the person’s responding. The transformation of stimulus function occurs when one stimulus is related to another, and the function of the former alters the function of the latter without direct training (Dymond & Rehfeldt, 2000). In the case of the example presented, the reinforcing functions associated with the verbal stimulus “effective behavior analyst” transform the function of the related goals and actions, establishing or strengthening the reinforcing function of these events. If this transformation produces an increase in the likelihood of engaging in the specific actions and achieving the stated goals, this effect can be interpreted as a motivative augmental rule. An RFT interpretation of rule-governed behavior, which posits that behavior can be brought under the control of verbal stimuli due to relational responding (e.g., hierarchical responding), includes motivative augmental rules, which are those that momentarily increase the strength of a reinforcer (S. C. Hayes et al., 2001). So, as indicated in Fig. 1 (right), if the values statement of reinforcing effect transforms the function of the stimuli included within the hierarchical network, then those goals/actions acquire an increased reinforcing effect. Therefore, they have a potential motivative effect, leading to a change in the individual’s responding. The behavior analyst highlighted here may become more likely to engage in behavior related to interobserver agreement, training, and fidelity checklists, therefore approaching goal attainment, and experiencing the reinforcing effect specified by the values statement. And, as these relations are strengthened and new goals/actions are related to this value, additional behavior that supports being “effective” can be strengthened, resulting in greater values–behavior coherence.

The example presented here includes an assumption that the individual can engage in future-oriented behavior, meaning that they can respond in terms of long-term or delayed consequences. Consistently attending relevant workshops, developing interobserver agreement and treatment fidelity protocols, and engaging in other behaviors increase the likelihood of good outcomes for clients, but these outcomes are delayed. For this interpretation of values to be appropriate, the individual must be able to respond to such delayed contingencies and not solely to immediate contingencies. This is important to note as a practitioner; a client’s tolerance of delayed reinforcers is clearly relevant to the motivative effect that values statements may have on responding. Biglan and Barnes-Holmes (2015) described additional relational framing skills that are relevant and may create a context in which the individual is able to respond to nonimmediate consequences related to values-coherent behavior, such as temporal, deictic, and causal relating. Temporal relations (those that include time-based dimensions such as “now” and “then”), deictic relations (those that involve perspective taking such as “here-there” or “now-then”), and causal relations (such as “if-then”) are critical if the individual will be responding to consequences likely “then” “if” they were to act “now” in the present environment. For example, a behavior analyst might respond to the delayed consequence of improved intervention quality (“then”) “if” they were to read a relevant special issue of Behavior Analysis in Practice “now.” Although contingencies in the present environment and the individual’s history of reinforcement contribute to responding, the mediation of these verbal relations and rule-governed behavior increase the individual’s capacity to “act in light of the future” (Biglan & Barnes-Holmes, 2015, p. 6).

This theoretical interpretation of values is conceptually consistent with an RFT account, yet not all components of this model have been demonstrated empirically in the literature. The formation of hierarchical networks through relational training and the transformation of stimulus function within these networks have been illustrated by the studies conducted by Slattery et al. (2011), Slattery and Stewart (2014), and Gil et al. (2012, 2014). Additionally, a model of the transformation of consequential function in accordance with hierarchical relational networks is needed, as has been demonstrated in the context of other relational frames such as coordination (e.g., S. C. Hayes et al., 1991; Whelan & Barnes-Holmes, 2004a, 2004b; Whelan et al., 2006). The motivating effect of values as verbal establishing stimuli within the context of hierarchical relations must be supported empirically, extending upon the results seen in studies evaluating motivative augments in accordance with equivalence relations (Ju & Hayes, 2008). Harte et al. (2020) provided an additional review of the current state of the research regarding the relationship between rule governance and derived relational responding. Specific studies examining the effect of values interventions on the functions of painful stimuli and participants’ experience of pain have been conducted; these studies highlight the motivative effect of values stimuli and interventions (e.g., Páez-Blarrina, Luciano, Gutiérrez-Martínez, Valdivia, Ortega, & Rodríguez-Valverde, 2008a; Páez-Blarrina, Luciano, Gutiérrez-Martínez, Valdivia, Rodríguez-Valverde, & Ortega, 2008b). As the basic and translational research substantiating this model of values within the ACT model has developed, so too has the application and refinement of values-based interventions within and related to the field of ABA.

The Role of Values in ACT-Based Intervention

Acceptance and commitment therapy, commonly referred to as acceptance and commitment training when applied in nonclinical or nonpsychotherapeutic settings (S. C. Hayes et al., 2011), is an approach characterized by a goal of creating “a unified process-based model of how to alleviate human psychological problems and promote behavioral effectiveness”; the empirical support for this approach among a large number of populations, settings, and target outcomes is well documented (S. C. Hayes et al., 2019, p. 226). ACT-based interventions are designed to increase psychological flexibility, one applicable definition of which is persisting with or changing of behavior, in accordance with values-based contingencies, while contacting all stimuli, both public and private, in the present environment (Bond et al., 2006)​. Kashdan and Rottenberg (2010) posited that psychological flexibility may be a critical aspect of human health, noting representative abilities such as adapting to situational demands, shifting behavioral repertoires when needed, maintaining balance among life domains, and engaging in behaviors congruent with personal values. The same authors described psychological flexibility as a dynamic pattern of behavior rather than a singular response in a specific situation. These descriptions highlight the central role of values in ACT-based intervention: The general goal of these interventions is to increase the coherence between an individual’s behavior and their values.

Many treatments designed to increase psychological flexibility do so by targeting six “core processes,” often referred to collectively as the “hexaflex,” which can be viewed as six interactive, dynamic behavioral repertoires (e.g., S. C. Hayes et al., 2011). Values(which include both the ability to articulate personal or group values and the action of valuing, or engagement in behaviors consistent with these stated values and that produce valued outcomes) represent one of these six core processes. Both values clarification and coherence play important roles in the design and evaluation of ACT-based intervention (e.g., Fitzpatrick et al., 2016). Although the present discussion is focused on the values process in isolation, it is often presented in conjunction with the process of “committed action” (engaging in those values-consistent behaviors), and the importance of mindfulness-focused processes (e.g., present moment, acceptance, defusion, self-as-context) in relation to values should not be ignored. One perspective in considering the relationship between these various core processes of the ACT model is to treat the mindfulness-focused processes as a means by which to address verbal and experiential “barriers” to values-driven behavior (S. C. Hayes et al., 2011).

Values serve as a guide for evaluating intervention outcomes, meaning the “success” of the intervention will be assessed, at least in part, by the increase of values-congruent behavior (and perhaps the decrease of values-inconsistent behavior) to a desirable and socially meaningful criterion, producing maximal valued reinforcement. For example, consider the same behavior analyst whose stated value is “being an effective behavior analyst.” If that person’s work performance were deficient in some way that produced poor treatment outcomes for clients, this would represent an important area for intervention, and an area of limited contact with preferred reinforcers. An increase in behaviors congruent with the stated value would not only improve job performance by making good client outcomes more likely but also maximize the high-value reinforcement the individual contacts. As noted by others, such as Barney et al. (2019), considering any one of the core processes in the ACT model in isolation paints an incomplete picture of the dynamic and complex processes that produce psychological flexibility. However, considering values–behavior coherence in isolation provides an avenue to operational measures of treatment effectiveness, which are necessary in behavioral intervention. The ratio of behaviors that produce valued outcomes (preferred reinforcers) to those that produce nonvalued outcomes (extinction, punishers, nonpreferred reinforcers) across time can be a useful guide to the “behavioral effectiveness” of an individual in various life domains.

Values clarification is present within the context of the ACT intervention. Barrett et al. (2019) reviewed values-based psychometric tools used within ACT interventions, highlighting several questionnaires and exercises designed to measure individuals’ ability to articulate their values, orient their behavior in terms of their values, and engage in valued action. There are several commonly implemented values-clarification exercises that exemplify the role of values in ACT interventions. One such exercise, referred to as the “bull’s-eye” intervention (Lundgren et al., 2012), includes the individual first stating their values across several prominent life domains, then evaluating their current consistency with those values in proximity to the “target” on the bull’s-eye, which represents a high degree of values–behavior coherence. Because there are many such exercises that have been published in academic and clinical outlets, an extensive review of these is not feasible in the current context. However, the bull’s-eye exercise is representative of many of the qualities found within values techniques, such as treating valuing as both choice and action, framing values statements in terms of purpose and meaning, and examining the individual’s current degree of valued action (S. C. Hayes et al., 2011). Following assessment and identification of values, if deficits in values-driven behavior are present, interventions designed to increase values–behavior coherence are implemented.

Values-Based Intervention

Research regarding the effectiveness of ACT interventions reads as almost ubiquitous in terms of the breadth of various populations, settings, and formats in which intervention has demonstrated some utility; there is empirical support or promise in many areas of clinical and nonclinical application (S. C. Hayes et al., 2019; F. J. Ruiz, 2010). Research specific to values-based intervention, similarly, includes varied populations and settings and has relevance in several areas pertaining to the practice of ABA. The empirical literature regarding values within the broader scope of psychology, human services, and other related fields is robust compared to the more limited research within the predominant ABA peer-reviewed journals. Reviewing the literature in this area presents a challenge: To address only the research produced by and for behavior analysts presents a narrow view of the available knowledge; however, to address research from all fields within the scope of the current article is not possible. Because of this, select relevant literature likely of interest to and pertaining to the work of behavior analysts will be summarized, in service of highlighting the utility of values-based intervention in common areas of practice. A further complication in this endeavor is that the “values” component is so intrinsically linked to the broader ACT approach, that to differentiate that which is “values” research from that which is just “ACT” research can be challenging. Therefore, the goal is for the reader to review the following with the knowledge that it is not exhaustive but should be informative.

Given the twofold role of values in ACT-based intervention, values-based intervention is applicable in several domains within the practice of ABA. Values-based intervention may be useful in the development and training of professionals within the field; in guiding decision making for individual practitioners, as well as behavior analysts as a group; in staff training and development; and in application with clients. Additionally, values-driven techniques and practices can be applicable personally to professionals in the field. Given the shared interest in values-based intervention in many related fields, the research in this area is varied in terms of the experimental designs (i.e., group and single-case research design), analysis of data (i.e., statistical and visual analyses), dependent measures (i.e., direct observation and self-report), and other variables related to the nature of the studies conducted. Again, the summary of literature provided is intended to feature the state of empirical evidence in as useful a manner as possible, and perhaps provide direction to practitioners and researchers interested in exploring certain areas of intervention further.

Guiding Decision Making

As discussed, the concept of values can be used to guide the decisions related to individual practitioners’ practice and the evolution of the field of ABA more generally. Although not specifically related to values, discussions in prominent journals in the field demonstrate the relevance of values in this area. For example, articles regarding the importance of measurement of social validity with recipients of behavior-change programs (e.g., Hanley, 2010), relationship building between caregivers and clients (e.g., Parsons et al., 2016), person-centered planning (e.g., Reid et al., 1999), and cultural awareness skills of behavior analysts (e.g., Fong et al., 2016), among others, highlight potential values guiding the behavior of professionals within the field and the potential utility of using a values framework to guide discussion and action in such areas. M. R. Ruiz and Roche (2007) described the role of values in ethical decision making, calling for discussion regarding the behavior-analytic “community’s aspirational goals, our values, and our visions for the future of behavior analysis” (p. 15). Although the literature in this area is currently largely conceptual, behavior analysts managing private practices, directing agencies, or leading others in the field might explore the available resources regarding embedding values within the design of groups (e.g., Atkins et al., 2019).

Professional Development

Interventions developed for behavior analysts in training and for practicing behavior analysts have been evaluated, although the research in this area is quite limited at present. Given the motivative effect of values, embedding elements of values-based intervention into undergraduate or graduate training programs, as well as within the continuing education and professional development of professionals, may be useful to increase performance related to the practice of behavior analysis. Paliliunas et al. (2018) evaluated a 6-week values-clarification and committed-action training program for graduate students in a behavior analysis and therapy program, with results suggesting statistically significant improvements in academic performance, psychological flexibility, and ratings of the importance of education-related values and greater social validity compared to a control group. Other investigations have explored the effectiveness of values-based interventions for college students generally (e.g., Chase et al., 2013; Firestone et al., 2019), which may be useful within training programs. Though there are several resources that could be used by practitioners to support their own values clarification and coherence, a “Mindful Action Plan” tool presented by Moran and Ming (2020) can guide behavior analysts specifically to engage in behavior that moves them toward their values as a professional, emphasizing productivity and self-compassion.

Organizational Behavior Management

Maraccini et al. (2016) discussed the implications of current knowledge regarding motivation and complex verbal behavior in the context of organizational behavior management (OBM) and suggested that the inclusion of accounts of derived relational responding, augmental rules, and other elements of an RFT account of motivation may strengthen interventions in workplace settings considerably. These authors stated specifically that the inclusion of values clarification in workplace training programs could serve to increase values–behavior coherence, supporting job performance. Herbst and Houmanfar (2009) discussed values-based approaches in OBM settings, describing recommendations for incorporating such approaches from both a Skinnerian- and an RFT-focused interpretation of values. Castro et al. (2016) evaluated the effects of a values-clarification and committed-action intervention on the engagement of direct care staff working with clients diagnosed with developmental disabilities in a multiple-baseline design, with results indicating an increase in engagement following a series of values workshops. Other investigations evaluating a general ACT intervention for staff trainers and direct care staff featuring values clarification and/or congruence as a major component have been completed to enhance the effectiveness of other behavioral techniques such as behavioral skills training (Little et al., 2020) and performance feedback (Pingo et al., 2019, 2020). Research in this area is promising, supporting further investigation in the application of values-focused techniques for staff training and job performance, both as standalone interventions and components of broader training and intervention packages. Practitioners might explore the literature and available resources regarding embedding values-based intervention in workplace settings to train new staff members (e.g., developing agency values and asking staff to relate these values to their own work-related values and identify actions they can take at work to move toward these values) and to enhance the performance of existing staff members (e.g., relate performance feedback to agency and employee values).

Parent Training

The use of ACT-based interventions in applications with parents of children with a variety of needs, such as autism spectrum disorder (ASD) or acquired brain injury, is well documented in the literature (e.g., Blackledge & Hayes, 2006; Brown et al., 2015; Hahs et al., 2019; Lunsky et al., 2018). Like the existing literature in OBM, the research in this area examines both the effect of ACT alone and in combination with other parent-training techniques on various measures of well-being and behavior change for the parents and their children. In this area, three recent articles stand out in terms of the prominence of values as a component or target of the intervention. Coyne et al. (2011) described tools and techniques practitioners can use in application with parent populations to support psychological flexibility, self-care, and positive parenting behaviors, including specific recommendations regarding values and values-driven committed actions. Similarly, Szabo et al. (2020) described techniques behavior analysts can implement to promote values-based behavior and positive family interactions. Gould et al. (2018) evaluated the effect of an ACT intervention for parents of children with ASD on the values-directed overt behavior of the participants. These authors included values clarification and consistency within the intervention protocol and targeted the frequency of values-directed parent behaviors as the primary dependent variable, defined as “any action resulting in a tangible outcome directly related to an individual parent-identified value”; for example, instances of parents engaging in a leisure or social event with their children, like eating dinner together at a restaurant, were classified as supporting the value “quality joyful moments together as a family” (p. 83). This study exemplifies the dual role of values as prominent in both the intervention and measurement of treatment effectiveness using an ACT-based approach. These articles suggest actionable steps practitioners can take to embed values within parent-training interventions, such as using parents’ values to help guide treatment goals and targeted outcomes and implementing values-clarification exercises to identify family values and support perspective taking to facilitate positive interactions among family members.

Treatment Plans for Individuals

The inclusion of values within treatment planning and implementation for children or adults with or without disabilities can be considered in two components: the use of client and caregiver values to guide treatment goals and targets for behavior change and the inclusion of values-based intervention within treatment plans. The former point is compatible with the discussion of values guiding decision making and is worthy of exploration in both research and practice. The latter point has been addressed more often in the literature regarding ACT-based interventions more generally for these populations (e.g., Hutchinson et al., 2019; Pahnke et al., 2019), and meta-analyses of ACT research with child populations are available (e.g., Fang & Ding, 2020). Hoffmann et al. (2016) discussed the role of ACT-based interventions for individuals with disabilities who exhibit challenging behaviors, including specific recommendations and exercises for values clarification and increased values-driven action. A study by Szabo (2019) demonstrated an approach to challenging behavior intervention that included ACT when seeking to reduce inflexible behaviors among children with ASD. Intervention protocols and models for children and adolescents in which values clarification and coherence are central components are increasingly available (e.g., Dixon, 2014; Dixon & Paliliunas, 2017; L. L. Hayes & Ciarrochi, 2015). At this point, research in this area seems to emphasize a general ACT-based approach. A potential avenue of future research may focus on values specifically to explore how to synthesize existing approaches to behavior intervention development with those that emphasize psychological flexibility.

Immediate and Future Avenues for Values Research and Practice

The research relevant to the role of values in behavior-analytic practice and intervention is growing. Current literature demonstrates promise in terms of the utility of values-based approaches in the areas of professional development, OBM, and intervention with various populations, but research using these techniques that applies behavior-analytic methods is needed in all these areas. Whereas both single-case and group research designs have utility in studies related to values, an emphasis on times-series designs and the demonstration of functional relations is useful in producing research that is needed within the field of behavior analysis and among related fields to provide sufficient evaluation of and guidance regarding values-based intervention (Dixon et al., 2020). Two broad categories in which behavior analysts may contribute to this research base are assessment of values and values-based intervention development. Others have evaluated the status of values-based measures and tools within ACT (see Barrett et al., 2019, and Reilly et al., 2019, for detailed information regarding available measures and tools), and these analyses reveal that existing assessments emphasize the self-report of values and the use of therapeutic exercises to articulate individuals’ values. The need for more comprehensive assessments of the valuing process and the occurrence of values–behavior coherence in addition to the articulation of values has been noted (e.g., Barney et al., 2019), including assessments that offer a more direct, momentary evaluation of the experience of values–behavior coherence and more individualized measures. A behavior-analytic approach that emphasizes direct observation, operational definition of values-consistent behavior, and measurement of values-driven behavior as a primary dependent measure could serve to strengthen the assessment of valuing considering the limitations noted by Barney et al. (2019). Being able to capture potential values, an individual’s ability to articulate values, and the degree of values–behavior coherence, for example, within the functional behavior assessment process is necessary and an area in which behavior analysts are uniquely suited to develop. In terms of values-based intervention, both the evaluation of protocols designed to support values clarification and congruence and the development/analysis of treatment components and specific techniques included within these protocols would be beneficial to behavior-analytic intervention. Studies regarding the formation of values statements (e.g., Katz et al., 2014), the selection of values-relevant stimuli (e.g., Sandoz & Hebert, 2015), and the comparison of various values-based exercises (e.g., Engle & Follette, 2018) exemplify the kinds of analyses that can aid in the development of effective interventions for use in practice. These studies highlight more molecular investigations of the processes and techniques that compose values-based intervention, which can serve to complement molar analyses that explore the effectiveness of values interventions in general. Additionally, behavior analysts may seek to refine the methodology available to incorporate verbal interventions more directly and effectively (i.e., values exercises) within the development and implementation of functional behavior assessments and interventions. Others have described in detail the utility of incorporating verbal behavior, particularly from an RFT perspective, within an account of complex behavior problems in order to extend beyond a purely contingency-based analysis (e.g., Barnes-Holmes et al., 2004), addressing verbal aspects of human behavior such as rule governance as they relate to psychological problems (e.g., Törneke et al., 2008); additionally, these authors have suggested the ACT model as a conceptually consistent way to translate this account into intervention. To address this increase in complexity, recent literature has suggested incorporating a psychological flexibility model into functional analysis (e.g., S. C. Hayes et al., 2020). Future research may explore, develop, and refine functional assessment techniques considering advancements in the understanding and treatment of complex human behavior.

For those behavior analysts interested in immediate avenues for incorporating values into practice, the current literature provides useful protocols and techniques, as well as a framework to embed these practices into professional development, staff development, and intervention development. Actionable items for practitioners in this area may begin with values clarification; how does expanding one’s practice to include ACT-based techniques support one’s values related to practice? Once this framework for action has been established, a behavior analyst may develop goals and objectives related to increasing competence in this area by consuming relevant literature, obtaining additional training, and seeking supervision in this area. Once the skills to do so have been established, the behavior analyst might focus on the areas of practice that have the most sufficient empirical support for values, such as staff training/development, parent training, and the implementation of existing protocols and curricula that address values in intervention for clients. Tarbox et al. (2020) offered six guidelines for practitioners interested in incorporating ACT into their practice while maintaining their own professional scope of practice; these are relevant in the context of values-specific intervention—for example, maintaining a focus on overt behavior change, obtaining guidance from supervision and empirical literature, and referring out when a presenting client or problem lies outside of one’s competence are important considerations for professionals. Additionally, Dixon et al. (2020) offered a list of self-reflective questions to guide a professional in their decision regarding their readiness to implement ACT-based interventions in terms of scope of the field, of practice, and of competence. While incorporating values into intervention can enhance performance in the domains listed previously, as always, it is imperative that behavior analysts are guided by ethical guidelines and professional expertise in their work.

Both in research and in practice there exists ample evidence to support the inclusion of values-based interventions in professional activity and a clear need for additional research to understand, develop, and refine these interventions. This discussion has maintained a focus on the values component of the ACT model; however, as previously noted, the model of psychological flexibility is dynamic, and all core processes interact with one another. Therefore, future work exploring the relationship of values to other core processes and values situated within the larger model is equally important. In a field that emphasizes socially important behavior change and in an era that is in part characterized by the demand to expand the reach of behavior-analytic interventions, increase interdisciplinary collaboration, and prioritize the voice of those who receive intervention, the inclusion of values in the training and practice of behavior analysis seems not only useful but also perhaps critical to achieving these ends in a manner that is both utterly behavioral and inherently accessible to professionals, clients, and the general public alike.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, or publication of this article.

Declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional human subjects committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.