Editorial Standards

Who is responsible for the content

Rob Spain, BCBA, IBA chooses the questions, contributes the professional point of view, and reviews the reasoning. Rob makes the final editorial decisions for articles and newsletter issues published under his name.

How editorial content is developed

For new and substantially revised editorial work, the goal is to start with a real reader decision and Rob's own input. Research findings, professional interpretation, and recommended action are kept distinct so readers can see where each conclusion comes from.

• Research claims are checked against the source material used for the page.
• Specific examples and observations must be verified and safely de-identified.
• Important limitations and decision boundaries are included when they change the practical conclusion.
• Testimonials, outcomes, customer claims, and performance numbers are not published without approved source data.

How AI-assisted tools may be used

AI-assisted tools may help organize research, develop a draft structure, edit for clarity, check consistency, and format approved material. They are not treated as a source of evidence or experience, and they do not make the final editorial judgment. Rob reviews and edits material published under his name.

We do not treat an AI detector score as evidence of quality or authorship. The standard is whether the work is accurate, useful, specific, attributable, and worth a reader's time.

Updates and corrections

Publication dates describe when a page was first released. Modification dates should change only after a substantive update. If you find a factual error, missing limitation, broken source, or unclear disclosure, please use the contact form and identify the page.