Publication trends in 25 years of the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.

The authors read every article in JABA from 1968 to 1992. They counted what topics were studied and where the work took place.

They looked at who the participants were. They noted if studies happened in clinics, schools, or homes.

Papers about developmental disabilities grew over time. Studies in real-world settings like homes and schools also grew.

At the same time, papers about academic skills and talking dropped. The journal shifted away from classroom drills and speech work.

Marshall et al. (2023) shows this same shift now shows up in practice. Their survey finds BCBAs today use fewer ABA methods and more non-ABA ones for autism. The journal trend from 1993 has reached the field.

DeRoma et al. (2004) keeps the trend going. Their preschool study is exactly the kind of natural-setting work the 1993 paper said was rising.

Gillberg et al. (1983) came before the shift. Their review of self-stimulation studies shows the older style of clinic-based work that later faded.

Tincani et al. (2019) looks at the same journal but asks a different question. While Szempruch et al. (1993) tracked what was studied, Tincani checked how graphs were drawn. Both use the same method—systematic review—but answer different needs.

If you write or read JABA today, expect most studies to be about autism in homes or schools. This helps you pick journals for continuing education. It also warns you that classic verbal behavior and academic papers are now rare. When you design studies, know the field now rewards naturalistic developmental work.