The Evolution of Positive Behavioral Intervention and Support

To fully understand the developing field of Positive Behavior Intervention and Support and its trajectory over time, one needs to understand how the field and the journal began. Shelley Clarke’s paper shows not only interesting trends in the Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions (JPBI) over an extended period of time, but it also highlights very important issues that can occur when an entirely new field is born. The birth of the JPBI was an exciting event that was immersed in the developing atmosphere of enthusiasm for starting a brand new field, the field of Positive Behavior Intervention and Support. The context leading to the start of this movement by itself was an event that played an important role in producing a positive trajectory for JPBI’s development. Thus, in considering the developing trajectory of JPBI, one also needs to consider how that trajectory began in the first place. Approximately 20 years ago, a group of well-known researchers in the behavioral sciences was discussing the need for a new journal that would address both values and science rather than just values or just science as most of the field was doing at that time. Among the researchers present at the meeting was Edward G. Carr (Ted). He announced that a new journal would be important if this movement toward positive behavioral interventions would succeed, and he took it upon himself to assign two researchers to start such a journal. For some reason, he assigned Glen Dunlap and me to develop this new journal. Something about the way he said it made it seem to Glen and me that we did not really have a choice. So, in a blind panic, we began.

The first thing we noticed was that it would be quite difficult to start a new journal because a journal needs to be in existence for several years before major indexing services, such as PsychInfo, will pick it up, and authors do not want to have their articles published in a journal that will not index their work for up to 7 years! That is, there was no trajectory in existence, and it takes courage to start one. Glen and I decided that for the first few years we were going to need to recruit very senior, well-known researchers who were dedicated to our cause (values and science combined) and who were such household names that they might be willing to take a chance on our journal, knowing that their work would eventually be indexed, and that not only would a very exciting trajectory begin, but they also would be able to play a role in the foundation of that trajectory. We managed to recruit some of the very top names in the field. Authors (such as Rob Horner, Wayne Sailor, Ann and Rud Turnbull, Ted Carr, Jacki Anderson, Lynn Koegel, etc.) all agreed that the cause was so important that they would be willing to gamble on JPBI becoming a success and they would publish their work in this new and yet unknown journal! Glen and I also contributed articles, and all of a sudden, we had enough material for some very exciting initial journal issues. And, in addition to being contributors, these authors also constituted an enthusiastic group that was so excited about what was happening that they eagerly spread the word about this new venture as far and wide as they possibly could. Everyone’s enthusiasm was contagious, and the journal not only rapidly grew in visibility and stature, but it became a huge success right from the very start. Thus, the foundation for a very exciting trend had begun.

This beginning also laid down some rules (cf. Carr et al., 2002; Horner et al., 1990) that would be very important for JPBI’s developing trajectory. The articles in this journal had to have a solid scientific base. They could not just present wild ideas that might need to be taken back when subsequent research showed them to be baseless. But, in emphasizing science, we were not willing to abandon values. Thus, the articles needed to focus on positive variables. This included both the procedures themselves needing to be positive (no electric shock, etc.) and the outcomes needing to be positive. Dependent variables (such as happiness, a pleasant and meaningful job or school placement, happy family interactions, etc.) all had to be positive. The journal also needed to focus on measureable behavior, not on unmeasureable hypothetical constructs. This meant that new variables and new definitions would have to be tested and developed over years into the future creating a whole new field of research itself. The journal would also need to focus on support for individuals with difficult needs. Some of us also felt that support was good, but that it was not enough. We also wanted a focus on intervention. Thus, both positive behavioral support and positive behavioral intervention were emphasized, and both of these terms played a large role in the development of the field as time advanced.

Thus, the trends began. The terms Positive, Behavioral, Support, Happiness, Meaningfulness, and Intervention all became words that were increasingly seen in the literature. The new and unknown journal became one of the most highly regarded journals in the behavioral sciences. Positive Behavior Interventions are not only journal terms, but they are widely used terms throughout behavioral sciences in general (including the fields of psychology, education, medicine, etc.). The trends that began in JPBI are skyrocketing. The future looks very positive indeed.