DOI work
Fetched
Post
crossref
Jacqueline M. Kemp, Amy N. Ethridge, Sarah M. Richling, Cecelia Z. Drummond, Joshua A. Soto
(2024).
Is “M&M® therapy” a misnomer or a concerning truth? A descriptive analysis of the use of edible reinforcers in applied behavior analytic research.
Behavioral Interventions, 39(3), e2005.
Wiley.
- Publication date
-
21 Feb 2024
- Identifier
-
10.1002/bin.2005
- Authors
-
Jacqueline M. Kemp,
Amy N. Ethridge,
Sarah M. Richling,
Cecelia Z. Drummond,
Joshua A. Soto
- Source
- Behavioral Interventions
- Details
- 39(3), e2005
- Reference type
- article
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Metadata source
- crossref
Abstract
Abstract Reinforcement is considered an essential component of many behavioral interventions. However, caregivers may criticize the use of edible reinforcers, particularly those viewed as unhealthy. Still, as evidenced by current attitudes toward the profession, addressing the concerns and criticisms of behavior analytic consumers is paramount. Thus, the purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which edible reinforcers are used within published behavior analytic research. To this end, we analyzed research published in six major behavior analytic journals across 3 years. Results indicate that edible reinforcement was utilized in less than one third of the studies using reinforcement often in combination with other nonedible reinforcers. However, it is important to consider potential negative externalities with the use of edible reinforcement and the need for future research on the use of edible reinforcers in clinical practice and research contexts.
Study authors in this cited reference