The Evolution of Behavior Analysis: Toward a Replication Crisis?

Locey (2020) wrote a think-piece, not an experiment. He asked one question: could behavior analysis fall into the same replication trap that hit psychology?

He looked at trends in our journals. More papers now use big between-group designs instead of small single-case replications.

The field’s old habit of repeating single-subject studies acts like a shield. It catches errors early.

That shield is cracking. Low-power group studies and the pressure for positive results invite false positives.

Elcoro et al. (2023) pick up where Locey stops. They give ready-made tools—citation maps and co-authorship scores—to spot silos and fix them.

Hobson (1987) and Saunders et al. (2005) cheer the move toward bigger social problems. Locey warns the same move can trade away our replication culture. The goals clash, but the fix is the same: keep running direct replications even in large-scale work.

Bowe et al. (1983) formed small clubs to protect behavioral language from mentalism. Locey wants the same club model to protect methodological purity from statistical drift.

You do not need to dump group designs, but you should anchor them with single-case replications. Build replication into grant timelines and student theses. Ask journals to welcome direct replications as much as novel findings. A five-subject replication today can save a million-dollar failure tomorrow.