Is social validity what we are interested in? Argument for a functional approach.
Pleasant comments feel good, but only data prove your treatment works.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Reed (1991) wrote a think-piece, not an experiment.
The paper looked at how behavior analysts use the words "social validity."
It asked: are we confusing happy surveys with real proof that a program works?
What they found
The author said consumer smiles and check marks are just opinions.
To know an intervention is truly good, you still need cold, hard outcome data.
How this fits with other research
Ricciardi et al. (2020) later did exactly what P urged: they gave staff a social-validity survey about data sheets and got high marks.
That survey result is useful, but it only shows acceptability—exactly P’s point that more validation is needed.
Novack et al. (2023) took the idea further, swapping surveys for heart-rate and cortisol in dogs because animals can’t fill out forms; objective measures answered the same social-validity question.
Tabin et al. (2021) showed a tool can look great on acceptability yet still be used wrong, backing P’s warning that liking something is not the same as proving it works.
Why it matters
Next time a parent or teacher says "I like this program," smile, then open your data book. Track the child’s actual progress—correct responses, rate of problem behavior, or daily living skills. Share those numbers along with the praise. You keep consumer buy-in while proving the plan really helps.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one current goal, graph the last two weeks of data, and show the chart to the caregiver before asking, "How does this look to you?"
02At a glance
03Original abstract
It is argued that neither the term social nor the term validity is best to identify the processes used or the results obtained in questioning consumers about the goals set, procedures employed, or outcomes achieved in habilitative programming. The term consumer satisfaction acknowledges the fact that it is essentially a collection of consumer opinions. The underlying intent of the process might be called habilitative validation, a name that seems to better guide our validation efforts. More important, in carefully considering consumer satisfaction assessment, it becomes clear that not only does consumer satisfaction itself need to be validated, but also that more objective methods can be used for assessing habilitative validity. However, legitimate uses still remain for consumer satisfaction measurement, as long as we do not mistake it for strong evidence of the habilitative validity of our goals, procedures, or outcomes.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1991 · doi:10.1901/jaba.1991.24-205