JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS 2018, 51, 436–439 NUMBER 2 (SPRING)

ON THE USE OF THE TERM ‘FREQUENCY’ IN APPLIED BEHAVIOR

ANALYSIS
JAMES E. CARR, MELISSA R. NOSIK, AND MOLLI M. LUKE
BEHAVIOR ANALYST CERTIFICATION BOARD

There exists a terminological problem in applied behavior analysis: the term frequency has been
used as a synonym for both rate (the number of responses per time) and count (the number of
responses). To guide decisions about the use and meaning of frequency, we surveyed the usage
of frequency in contemporary behavior-analytic journals and textbooks and found that the pre-
dominant usage of frequency was as count, not rate. Thus, we encourage behavior analysts to use
frequency as a synonym for count.
Key words: behavioral measurement, count, frequency, rate

Merbitz, Merbitz, and Pennypacker (2016)
recently identified a terminological problem in
behavior analysis. The term frequency has been
used as a reference to both the rate of a
response (the number of responses per time) as
well as its count (the number of responses).
Thus, the terms rate and count are unambigu-
ous in their meaning, but the term frequency is
not because it has been used as a synonym for
both rate and count within the discipline. To
illustrate the two uses of frequency in behavior
analysis, Merbitz et al. cited textbooks that use
frequency as rate (e.g., Cooper, Heron, &
Heward, 2007) and frequency as count (e.g.,
Mayer, Sulzer-Azaroff, & Wallace, 2012). Fur-
thermore, the authors pointed out that fre-
quency has different meanings across disciplines.
For example, in physics, frequency refers to the
number of cycles of an event in a given period
(i.e., rate), but in statistics, frequency refers to
the number of times an event occurs
(i.e., count). Merbitz et al. argued that because
count is generally not a useful dependent mea-
sure, frequency should be used to mean rate.
Although we do not agree that this
This article is not an official position of the Behavior
Analyst Certification Board.
Address correspondence to the first author at Behavior
Analyst Certification Board, 7950 Shaffer Parkway, Little-
ton, CO 80127 USA. E-mail: carr@bacb.com
doi: 10.1002/jaba.449
© 2018 Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
436
recommendation logically follows from their
assertion, we nevertheless believe that the issue
is important enough to warrant additional
attention. Before a recommendation about the
meaning of frequency is made, however, a more
comprehensive assessment of its use is neces-
sary. Thus, we reviewed Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis (JABA), Journal of the Experi-
mental Analysis of Behavior (JEAB), and
behavior-analytic textbooks to determine how
frequency was used by contemporary authors in
behavior analysis.
For the journal analysis, two raters (the sec-
ond and third authors) reviewed the methods
and results sections of empirical articles pub-
lished in the 2016 volumes of JABA and JEAB
(78 and 43 empirical articles, respectively). If
the term frequency appeared, we first deter-
mined whether it was being used colloquially
or technically. Instances of the former were
excluded and the remaining articles (JABA, 33;
JEAB, 11) were used for subsequent analysis. If
frequency was used in a technical manner, the
target and adjacent passages and figures were
reviewed to determine whether it was used as
rate or count. An instance of frequency was
coded as count only if there was no mention of
an observational period in relation to the
datum; otherwise, the instance was scored as
rate. Intercoder agreement was assessed for all
of the articles and agreement values well
 FREQUENCY 437

exceeded conventional standards.1 As illustrated

in Figure 1, the vast majority of technical uses
of frequency referred to count (JABA: 84.8% of
articles; JEAB: 81.8% of articles). Although fre-
quency was used as rate in 18.2% of JEAB arti-
cles, this figure represents only two articles.
For the textbook analysis, 13 behavior-
analytic books were reviewed for their use of
frequency, which primarily occurred in chapters
on measurement. The textbooks were sampled
from the following behavior analysis domains:
research methods (Bailey & Burch, 2002;
Barlow, Nock, & Hersen, 2009; Gast &
Ledford, 2014; Johnston & Pennypacker,
2009; Kazdin, 2011), the experimental analysis
of behavior (EAB; Catania, 2007; Mazur,
2017; Pierce & Cheney, 2013), and applied
behavior analysis (ABA; Cooper et al., 2007;
Kazdin, 2001; Martin & Pear, 2015; Mayer,
Sulzer-Azaroff, & Wallace, 2014; Miltenberger,
2012). As shown in Table 1, the most common
use of frequency was as count. Six of the text-
books used frequency as count, four used fre-
quency as rate, and three did not use frequency
at all. We note that the JEAB and EAB-
textbook data indicate that frequency is generally
not used in EAB, which places this particular
terminological issue within the ABA domain.
Merbitz et al. (2016) identified that the
examination task lists of the now-defunct Flor-
ida Behavior Analysis Certification Program Figure 1. The percentage of articles that used fre-
(Starin, Hemingway, & Hartsfield, 1993) used quency to mean count, rate, or both count and rate, or used
frequency in an unclear manner in the 2016 volumes of
frequency as rate, but that the Behavior Analyst JABA (top panel) and JEAB (bottom panel).
Certification Board®’s (BACB®) task lists have
used frequency as count. The authors imply that
recent examples of frequency as count in the lit- particular year was chosen because it was sev-
erature are an influence of the BACB’s activity. eral years earlier than the BACB’s incorporation
Although such a broad impact on the literature date in 1998. The term frequency was used
is unlikely, we nevertheless collected data to technically in 31 of the 68 (45.6%) empirical
evaluate this hypothesis. We reviewed the 1995 articles published that year. Frequency was used
volume of JABA for the usage of frequency. This as count in 28 (90.3%) of these articles, dem-
onstrating that the usage patterns illustrated in
1 Figure 1 predated the BACB.
A full description of coding procedures and intercoder
agreement data are available from the authors upon From a behavior-analytic perspective, the
request. “meaning” of a term is derived from the
438 JAMES E. CARR et al.

Table 1
Use of the Term Frequency in Behavior-Analytic Textbooks

Frequency is
Used to
Author(s) (Year) Title Content Domain Mean … Illustrative Quotation
Bailey & Burch Research Methods in Applied Research Methods Count “The term rate is used whenever the
(2002) Behavior Analysis frequency is expressed per unit of
time…” p. 90
Barlow, Single Case Experimental Research Methods Rate “The most widely used dimension in
Nock, & Designs: Strategies for all of behavioral science is
Hersen Studying Behavior Change frequency, also known as rate.”
(2009) p. 107
Gast & Ledford Single Case Research Research Methods Not used “…rate and frequency are often used
(Eds.) Methodology: Applications in interchangeably as are frequency
(2014) Special Education and and count.” p. 125
Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.)
Johnston & Strategies and Tactics of Research Methods Rate “…the average number of events per
Pennypacker Behavioral Research (3rd ed.) unit time.” p. 358
(2009)
Kazdin (2011) Single-Case Research Designs: Research Methods Count “…the rate of response can be
Methods for Clinical and obtained by dividing the frequency
Applied Settings (2nd ed.) of responses by the number of
minutes observed each day.” p. 75
Cooper, Applied Behavior Analysis (2nd Applied Behavior Rate “Combining observation time with
Heron, & ed.) Analysis count yields one of the most
Heward widely used measures in applied
(2007) behavior analysis, rate
(or frequency)…” p. 76
Kazdin (2001) Behavior Modification in Applied Behavior Count “the rate of response can be
Applied Settings (6th ed.) Analysis determined by dividing the
frequency of the responses by the
number of minutes observed each
day.” p. 81
Martin & Pear Behavior Modification: What It Applied Behavior Rate “Frequency (or rate) of behavior refers
(2015) Is and How To Do It Analysis to the number of instances of a
(10th ed.) behavior that occur in a given
period of time.” p. 201
Mayer, Sulzer- Behavior Analysis for Lasting Applied Behavior Count “…you can also report the rate of
Azaroff, & Change (3rd ed.) Analysis behavior, expressed as the frequency
Wallace of the behavior divided by a
(2014) standard period of time.” p. 117
Miltenberger Behavior Modification: Applied Behavior Count “Frequency may be reported as rate,
(2012) Principles & Procedures Analysis which is frequency divided by the
(5th ed.) time of the observation period.”
p. 23
Catania (2007) Learning (Interim 4th ed.) Experimental Count “total responses over a fixed time,
Analysis over a session of variable duration
of Behavior or, in a trial procedures, over a
fixed number of trials.” p. 390
Mazur (2017) Learning and Behavior Experimental Not used N/A
(8th ed.) Analysis
of Behavior
Pierce & Behavior Analysis and Learning Experimental Not used N/A
Cheney (5th ed.) Analysis of
(2013) Behavior

circumstances that give rise to its use (Skinner, behavior analysis is count, not rate. However,
1957). Based on the aforementioned analyses, regardless of the prevalence of specific usage,
the predominant meaning of frequency in the truth criterion in behavior analysis is
 FREQUENCY
effective action (Skinner, 1945), so any recom-
mendations for changing terminology should
be based on clear pragmatic benefits likely to
be associated with the change (Leigland, 1984).
We have not yet encountered any proposed
benefits associated with using frequency to mean
rate instead of count. On the surface, it might
appear that the pragmatic course of action
would be to retain rate and count, both of
which have unambiguous meanings, and jetti-
son frequency. However, in our analysis of the
2016 volumes of JABA and JEAB, we did not
encounter a single instance of count being used
in a technical manner. Thus, to follow through
with this course of action, thousands of behav-
ior analysts would need to stop using frequency
and start using count instead. A less onerous
task would be to simply continue with the
common practice of using rate to reflect the
number of responses per time and frequency to
reflect the number of responses.
REFERENCES
Bailey, J. S., & Burch, M. R. (2002). Research methods in
applied behavior analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Barlow, D. H., Nock, M. K., & Hersen, M. (2009). Sin-
gle case experimental designs: Strategies for studying
behavior change (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.
Catania, A. C. (2007). Learning (Interim 4th ed.). Corn-
wall-on-Hudson, NY: Sloan Publishing.
Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2007).
Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH:
Pearson.
Gast, D. L., & Ledford, J. R. (Eds.). (2014). Single case
research methodology: Applications in special education
and behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Routledge.
439
Johnston, J. M., & Pennypacker, H. S. (2009). Strategies
and tactics of behavioral research (3rd ed.). Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kazdin, A. E. (2001). Behavior modification in applied set-
tings (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Kazdin, A. E. (2011). Single-case research designs: Methods
for clinical and applied settings (2nd ed.). New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Leigland, S. (1984). On “setting events” and related con-
cepts. The Behavior Analyst, 7, 41-45. https://doi.
org/10.1007/BF03391884
Martin, G., & Pear, J. (2015). Behavior modification:
What it is and how to do it (10th ed.). London, UK:
Routledge.
Mayer, G. R., Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Wallace, M. (2012).
Behavior analysis for lasting change (2nd ed.). Corn-
wall-on-Hudson, NY: Sloan.
Mayer, G. R., Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Wallace, M. (2014).
Behavior analysis for lasting change (3rd ed.). Corn-
wall-on-Hudson, NY: Sloan.
Mazur, J. E. (2017). Learning and behavior (8th ed.).
New York, NY: Routledge.
Merbitz, C. T., Merbitz, N. H., & Pennypacker, H. S.
(2016). On terms: Frequency and rate in applied
behavior analysis. The Behavior Analyst, 39, 333-338.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-015-0048-z
Miltenberger, R. G. (2012). Behavior modification: Princi-
ples and procedures (5th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.
Pierce, W. D., & Cheney, C. D. (2013). Behavior analysis
and learning (5th ed.). New York, NY: Psychology
Press.
Skinner, B. F. (1945). The operational analysis of psycho-
logical terms. Psychological Review, 52, 270-277.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0062535
Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York, NY:
Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Starin, S., Hemingway, M., & Hartsfield, F. (1993).
Credentialing behavior analysts and the Florida
behavior analysis certification program. The Behavior
Analyst, 16, 153-166. https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF03392620
Received September 17, 2017
Final acceptance January 2, 2018
Action Editor, Timothy Vollmer