Blair Bryan J, Farros Jesslyn N
1Long Island University, Brooklyn, Brooklyn, NY USA.
Library Learning Center, 1 University Plaza, Brooklyn, NY 11201 USA.
Anal Verbal Behav. 2019 Jul 24;35(2):235-244. doi: 10.1007/s40616-019-00114-0. eCollection 2019 Dec.
Behavior analysts operationally define relations among environmental stimuli and behavior both functionally and topographically, and an insistence on objectivity, precision, reliability, and accuracy for technical descriptions and definitions is a unique and defining characteristic of the field. However, occasionally, technical terms are inconsistently used by behavior-analytic educators, researchers, and practitioners, and these inconsistencies should be addressed. Because they can pose conceptual and practical issues if not fixed, terminological inconsistencies are not merely inconveniences. In the current paper, we identified and explained terminological inconsistencies with the usage of the term in published behavior-analytic textbooks, manuals, and other reference materials. In addition, we revisited previous analyses and recommendations and restated the need for clarity in a verbal operant taxonomy, particularly for instructors, trainers, and authors of future textbooks, trainings, and manuals.
行为分析师从功能和形式上对环境刺激与行为之间的关系进行操作性定义，并且坚持技术描述和定义要客观、精确、可靠和准确，这是该领域独特的决定性特征。然而，行为分析教育工作者、研究人员和从业者偶尔会不一致地使用技术术语，这些不一致性应该得到解决。由于如果不加以纠正，它们可能会引发概念和实际问题，所以术语不一致不仅仅是不便之处。在当前的论文中，我们识别并解释了已发表的行为分析教科书、手册及其他参考资料中该术语使用上的术语不一致情况。此外，我们重新审视了之前的分析和建议，并再次强调在言语行为分类法中保持清晰的必要性，特别是对于未来教科书、培训材料和手册的编写者、培训师和作者而言。
