Practitioner Development

A Call to Investigate and Improve the Research Literacy of Professional Behavior Analysts

Bank et al. (2024) · Perspectives on Behavior Science 2024
★ The Verdict

Use the Six Boxes checklist to find the real reason you skip journals, then pick the matching fix.

✓ Read this if BCBAs who supervise staff or run team meetings.
✗ Skip if RBTs who already have assigned reading lists.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Bank and colleagues built a map called the Six Boxes Model. The map shows six things that block BCBAs from reading research.

They drew the map after talking with working analysts and looking at older papers. The goal was to give teams a quick way to spot and fix each block.

02

What they found

The Six Boxes are: time, access, skills, motivation, social support, and workplace culture. If even one box is empty, reading drops.

The paper gives one fix per box. Example: set a daily Google Scholar alert to beat the access box.

03

How this fits with other research

Keene et al. (2026) tested which part of BST teaches data collection fastest. They found modeling beats lecture, matching Bank’s call for quick, skill-based fixes.

Jimenez-Gomez et al. (2019) used BST to teach naturalistic play. Their rapid staff mastery shows the Six Boxes plan can work if you pick the right teaching method.

None of the neighbor studies contradict the model; they just apply BST to different skills. Together they say: show, don’t tell, and give feedback.

04

Why it matters

Next time your team says “no time to read,” pull up the Six Boxes. Tick each box in two minutes. You will see exactly what to change—maybe schedule a 15-minute journal club or share one free PDF a week. Small, named fixes beat vague urges to “read more.”

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Print the Six Boxes, rate your team in each, and start the lowest score’s fix this week.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
theoretical
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

The effectiveness of behavior-analytic service delivery is likely to depend in part on the process of applying knowledge from the laboratory to a service setting. Therefore, a regular review of the literature is an important part of effective practice. It has been proposed that a review of the literature is one of the pillars of evidence-based practice in applied behavior analysis. An effective review of the literature requires five distinct research literacy skills: (1) efficiently finding relevant research investigations or discussions; (2) accessing a full text copy; (3) reading and evaluating; (4) applying what was read to practice; and (5) staying current. In this paper we apply the Six Boxes Model to delineate behavioral influences and possible barriers to research literacy, suggest potential interventions to improve the research literacy of professional behavior analysts, and identify potential research opportunities in this area.

Perspectives on Behavior Science, 2024 · doi:10.1007/s40614-024-00422-4