Volunteer Identity

Generality is a change in behavior that lasts across time and translates to multiple environments (Baer, Wolf & Risley, 1968). There no generality as we do not know if this volunteer identity will cross into other environments, for example being an employee. We do not know if this, volunteer identity will be the same in years to come.
Effective means did the results produce a huge effect that is useful (Baer et al., 1968). I do think the volunteer identity study is effective because, the example says that the results are, “statistically significant” (Dr. Howard’s Final exam, 2016). My only issue is asking is the results useful? I think the results would have been useful if the example told how I could gain a volunteer identity.
A good way to know if the Technological dimension is fulfilled, is after reading the study, do you feel like you could get the same results by replicating the study (Baer et al., 1968)? I have no idea

If society does not value, the problem that is being studied then it is not Applied. I would say that this hypothesis slightly meets the criteria of being applied. Many people volunteer, and people tend to want to be happy. If I was to volunteer and knew that if I developed a “strong volunteer identity” that it might make me happy, I would try to gain that identity (Dr. Howard’s Final exam, 2016). A limitation is that we do not really have any measurement of how invested society really is, in this problem. Also according to Baer et al., (1968) “In applied research, there is typically a close relationship between the behavior and stimuli under study and the subject in whom they are studied ”(p. 92). I take this to mean, that there needs to be a need from the volunteers that are being studied. There is no mentioned of the volunteers that are being studied are unhappy and wanting to know if they can become happier by developing this