Deriving relations from the experimental analysis of behavior.
Treat basic-research procedures as flash-cards and match them to your clinical pictures to find ready-made interventions.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Elsmore et al. (1994) wrote a think-piece, not an experiment.
They told clinicians to treat every Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior article like a flash-card.
Match that basic-research card to your real-life client problem.
If the two cards look alike, try the lab procedure in your clinic.
What they found
The paper gives no numbers.
It simply argues that side-by-side comparison speeds up translation.
The authors claim you will spot usable tactics faster than reading reviews.
How this fits with other research
Boyle et al. (2018) took the same idea and focused it on one topic: behavioral contrast.
They urge you to test contrast in classrooms and clinics, showing the matching idea is still alive.
Burack et al. (2004) push the matching rule further.
They warn that autism comparison groups must be hand-picked, not copied from other studies.
Walmsley et al. (2019) turn the metaphor into a checklist.
Their four-step filter helps you decide if a non-behavioral fad is worth your time.
Together these papers build a bridge crew: the 1994 map plus later guardrails.
Why it matters
Next time you open JEAB, pause after each abstract.
Ask, "Which client scene looks like this chamber?"
Write the match on a sticky note and tape it to your desk.
In one week you will have a personalized cookbook of lab-tested ideas ready to pilot.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one JEAB study from last month, list its key features, then write a client scenario that shares those features.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Reviewing a basic research study in JEAB and then trying to relate aspects of the methods and results to applied work appears to involve com- paring a sample stimulus to a variety of comparison stimuli.In this instance, the sample stimulus (in- formation in JEAB) for the dinician or applied investigator is less familiar and more novel than the comparison stimuli (dinical and applied problems).The task of the applied behavior analyst is to discern from among the comparison stimuli which best matches, is relevant, and shares equivalent relations with the sample.Whether the relational responding anticipated by this series, "Develop- ments in Basic Research and Their Potential Ap- plication," will combine with direct contingencies (e.g., Hayes & Hayes, 1993, p. 507) has yet to be demonstrated.But, perhaps, by considering de- velopments in basic research, methods for enhanc- ing both correct matching and contingency con- tacting can be identified so as to advance the cause of relating basic and applied research.Three previous artides in this series share some common features.Each has described recentJEAB artides in a manner far less technical than the orig- inal version.A second common feature is that other artides in this series appear to have a theme.Themes ranged from "Convergence" (Hineline & Wacker, 1993), to "Collateral Effects" (Shull & Fuqua, 1993), to "The Applied Importance of Relational Responding" (Hayes & Hayes, 1993).In this regard we shall be no different.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1994 · doi:10.1901/jaba.1994.27-763