The purpose of this paper was to conduct a systematic review of studies on mands for information. We used a combination of keywords to search for articles through PsycINFO® and then conducted reference and citation searches for all articles that met our inclusion criteria. In total, we identified 32 studies with 35 experiments. The most commonly investigated autoclitic frames were where and who, and the least investigated were why and how. Over half of the studies included an evocative scenario that served as a test condition, but did not include a control condition; however, there was an overall increasing trend toward including both conditions starting in 2007. The authors of the published studies reported that participants received information, which led to other reinforcers. We make recommendations for clinical practice, as well as discuss directions for future research.

中文翻译：

---

对信息需求的系统评价

本文的目的是对有关信息需求的研究进行系统评价。我们使用关键字组合通过 PsycINFO® 搜索文章，然后对所有符合我们纳入标准的文章进行参考和引文搜索。我们总共确定了 32 项研究和 35 项实验。最常被调查的自粘框架是何地和谁，而调查最少的是为什么和如何。. 超过一半的研究包括作为测试条件的令人回味的场景，但不包括控制条件；然而，从 2007 年开始，包括这两种情况的总体趋势呈上升趋势。已发表研究的作者报告说，参与者收到了信息，这导致了其他强化物。我们为临床实践提出建议，并讨论未来研究的方向。