CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 39Behavioral and Psychological StudiesMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsAcademic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology

Process-based functional analysis can help behavioral science step up to novel challenges: COVID - 19 as an example

Open access
Hayes, Steven C., Hofmann, Stefan G., Stanton, Cory E.·2020·Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science
DOI 10.1016/j.jcbs.2020.08.009PMC PMC7445588
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Historically speaking, the behavioral tradition advanced functional analysis as a method of applying existing principles to novel situations. In the more than half a century since that idea was advanced, functional analysis has either fallen into disuse, as in most of applied psychology, or has been used but modified to a point that is virtually inapplicable elsewhere, as in applied behavior analysis work with severe developmental disabilities. In this paper we argue that the current challenges with COVID-19 present an ideal time to reinvigorate functional analysis by combining it with the growing body of evidence on processes of change, organized under an extended evolutionary meta-model. This new form of process-based functional analysis takes advantage of the strengths of contextual behavioral science, while opening avenues of fruitful interaction with other wings of intervention and evolutionary science more generally. Using the psychological flexibility model as an example, we show how this approach solves the key problems of classical functional analysis and helps professionals deal with novel challenges such as those posed by COVID-19. Humanity is now facing an extraordinary and unexpected situation. Behavioral science needs to rise to that challenge in a way that provides both immediate practical value and greater assurance of long-term benefits for our understanding of human complexity more generally. Process-based functional analysis can be a vehicle to do just that.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jcbs.2020.08.009

Cites

139 of 139 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The nomothetically-based pauci-variate, linear and unidirectional nature of mediation needs ultimately to be put aside in favor of idiographic complex network analysis.

    “While the nomothetically-based pauci-variate, linear and unidirectional nature of mediation needs ultimately to be put aside in favor of idiographic complex network analysis 72 , that literature provides an empirical foundation for the steps that are now called for in evidence-based care.”

    From “Third-wave” cognitive and behavioral therapies and the emergence of a process-based approach to intervention in psychiatry (2021) · cites this paper as [72]

    In “Functional analysis reimagined” (page unavailable), the paper calls for a dynamically sensible view of mediation that can be applied idiographically. In “An extended evolutionary form of process-based functional analysis” (page unavailable), it advocates complex networks with potentially bidirectional relationships. It does not characterize mediation as pauci-variate or say mediation should be put aside altogether; it instead calls for refining mediation and continues to use mediational findings. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 143 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Hayes S.C. Hofmann S.G. Process-based CBT: The science and core clinical competencies of cognitive behavioral therapy 2018 Context Press/New Harbinger Publications Oakland, CA
  2. Hayes S.C. Hofmann S.G. Ciarrochi J. Creating an alternative to syndromal diagnosis: Needed features of processes of change and the models that organize them Hofmann S.G. Hayes S.C. Beyond the DSM: Toward a process-based alternative for diagnosis and mental health treatment 2020 Context Press/New Harbinger Publications Oakland, CA 1 22
  3. Hayes S.C. Hofmann S.G. Ciarrochi J. Building a process-based diagnostic system: An extended evolutionary approach Hofmann S.G. Hayes S.C. Beyond the DSM: Toward a process-based alternative for diagnosis and mental health treatment 2020 Context Press/New Harbinger Publications Oakland, CA 251 278
  4. Hofmann S.G. Hayes S.C. Beyond the DSM: A process-based approach 2020 Context Press/New Harbinger Publications Oakland, CA
  5. Hofmann, S.G., Hayes, S.C., & Lorscheid, D. (in preparation). Learning process-based therapy. Oakland, CA: Context Press / New Harbinger Publications.
  6. Jablonka E. Lamb M.J. Evolution in four dimensions, revised edition Genetic, epigenetic, behavioral, and symbolic variation in the history of life 2014 MIT Press Boston, MA
  7. Paul G.L. Behavior modification research: Design and tactics Franks C.M. Behavior therapy: Appraisal and status 1969 McGraw-Hill New York 29 62
  8. Törneke N. Luciano C. Barnes‐Holmes Y. Bond F.W. RFT for clinical practice: Three core strategies in understanding and treating human suffering 2015 The Wiley handbook of contextual behavioral science
  9. Wilson D.S. Hayes S.C. Evolution and contextual behavioral science: An integrated framework for understanding, predicting, and influencing human behavior 2018 Context Press/New Harbinger Publications Oakland, CA

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hayes, S. C., Hofmann, S. G., & Stanton, C. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Nevada, Reno (US)
  • Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
Hayes, Steven C.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-10
Volume
18
Pages
128-145
ISSN
2212-1447 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jcbs.2020.08.009
PMC
PMC7445588
OpenAlex
W3081114226
Semantic Scholar
1c3f6d0e94cbb5af37250f3a513cf23360abad56
Cited by
39
References
143
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 3
FWCI
10.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH099021, U01MH108168)
  • WILEY
  • Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
  • National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (R01AT007257)
  • Association for Psychological Science
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › General Psychology › Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
Keywords
functional analysis, COVID-19 pandemic, contextual behavioral science, change processes, applied behavior analysis, evolutionary biology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review