BCBAs are all about dissemination. We want the world to listen to us because we have the secrets of the universe! OK, yes, that’s a little sarcastic, but an understanding of behavior is definitely useful and interesting to talk about. ABA can offer solutions to a lot of world problems, from social justice to traffic safety. We’re so into educating people about ABA and behavior science because we have a lot to offer. Many of us really do want to help and make a difference.
Some dissemination goals are a little less noble though, namely the idea that all autistics require ABA if they are ever to lead a good life. We’re not talking about that today, though. That’s a different post.
Today, we’re talking about why ABA can’t seem to get the dissemination it craves so badly. Well, there’s a very simple reason for it: ABA practitioners are notorious for being huge assholes.
So unfair, right? Poor us. If only the world understood that we just want to help, and that we also have superpowers and all of the knowledge worth knowing.
No.
People don’t get reputations in vacuums. What are reputations but verbal behavior regarding a learning history with that person? We have a reputation for being assholes because so many of us are assholes.
A problematic learning history
From the time we begin grad school, the science itself is treated and interpreted as the truth which only a select few understand. Or at least that’s how it can come across. Sometimes the person sounding like that is honestly just passionate, and there’s nothing wrong with having passion for your field. It can also sometimes feel like we really are the only ones who understand anything about autism and/or behavior. We’ve all had our fair share of infuriating conversations with people outside of the field who have no idea what we do, but who think they do, or will never accept being wrong about what we do (:cough: insurance companies :cough:).
That passion and camaraderie through frustration has valid origins, but it can also come across to impressionable and excited grad students as hero worship or even cult like. We stress critical thinking and unbiased interpretation, but there’s also contingencies in places that punish criticizing or questioning ABA. “Yes, ABA has a nasty past, but we know better now.”
But what about–
WE KNOW BETTER NOW! IT’S BETTER!
In winning these arguments with ignorant people, our behavior of judging them and their field as a whole for their lack of understanding of behavior is reinforced. Don’t get me wrong: Willful ignorance is not acceptable from any field, but it doesn’t make ours infallible. Even a history of success does not reach a point where criticism is no longer valid. Criticism is always valid and any respectable science should be actively seeking it. That goes for individual practitioners as well. We have our own celebrities in the field who may have done truly admirable work or who continue to inspire you from the time you were a wide-eyed grad student to now, a seasoned practitioner. It’s great to have role-models, but you can’t protect them from criticism.
Critical thinking
I’ve been disappointed to find that the people who talk about critical thinking the most are usually the worst at implementing it. The Skeptic Society is a perfect example of this. I was so excited to go to their meetups and learn about the sciency things and have intellectual conversations, only to find not a single actual skeptic in the whole group. They’re not skeptics, they’re just Atheists. Which is fine but… call it what it is.
I said what I said.
Anyway, ABA tends to suffer from a similar hypocrisy. We love to tout science and dismiss anything not defined in observable and measurable terms. We hold ourselves above all others because only we have the great wisdom of B.F. Skinner and Jon Bailey under our belts. They just don’t get it; criticism of our Ways just means they don’t understand what we do.
It’s true some criticism is poorly informed, but to use that to shut out all criticism is bad science. If we are going to prevent our tried-and-true methods from being scrutinized, and dismiss any inkling of retiring them, then what’s the point of calling ourselves a science? When you’ve stopped questioning and started ousting anyone who does, you don’t have a discipline anymore, you have a cult.
The point of science is to be constantly measuring and reexamining. Science is always learning, and our knowledge and opinions change with new information provided. Sometimes, that information is hard to hear, and it may mean reexamining huge chunks of our own worldviews, but science doesn’t care about your feelings. Take the time you need to cope with being incredibly wrong, but don’t dig your heels in to avoid the discomfort. That does a disservice to the very field you claim to defend, not to mention the actual living beings who have to suffer from that disservice.
While we’re thinking critically, let’s talk about empirical support. Some harsh critics of ABA have been saying that ABA is not empirically supported. That was a tough one for me, but it has to do with the fact that ABA is not well defined, which is a different post. Empirical support is the heart of everything we do. We don’t do things that aren’t empirically supported. We don’t support things that aren’t empirically supported. We speak out against things that aren’t empirically supported.
What is empirically supported? I’m not asking what the term means, I’m asking what is supported by the empirical.
See, especially in the autism world, we are very focused on the results shown in our data and typically enjoy smugly throwing it in our critics’ faces (our critics of course most often being autistics themselves and their allies). As in my discussion of observability and measurability though, we only have empirical support for what we’ve measured. Perhaps the results we aimed for are sound, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t other effects we either didn’t or couldn’t measure. The data is not infallible either.
I know. I know. I needed to wash my mouth out after that one too, but it’s true and I think Data would agree with me.
Data measures exactly what it measures, nothing more, nothing less. Sometimes it can reveal that other information needs to be explored, but not always, and it’s still not the full picture. You asked a question, data gave you the answer to that question, but it’s hard to get other answers if you don’t know what questions to ask.
No one’s impressed.
At some point in time, people reinforced huge egos. They must have, or there wouldn’t be so many people out there thinking that it’s impressive. Most of them are older (OK Boomer), but there are plenty of young padawans eager to learn. In the relentless defense of ABA, there’s sometimes the aggressive rehashing of achievements. Look at all of these publications with my name on it, look at all these years I’ve been working. I’ve worked with X number of people and all of them worship the ground I walk on. You’re just jealous because you’re stupid and don’t know about the great and powerful Behavioral Science.
These are the things we’re saying to the “non-believers” in an attempt to get them to respect and trust us. It seems we’ve missed the memo that that kind of behavior is aversive and makes others want to engage in escape and avoidance behaviors when we are present. Especially if someone really doesn’t have a strong understanding of the science of behavior, how is aggressively throwing your degree in their face going to fix anything?
Spoiler alert: It doesn’t. It just makes you look like an asshole.
A lot of people try to teach this as a “social skill” to autistics and somehow don’t see the irony.
If we want others to respect and understand the value of our field, we need to first stop assuming it’s god’s gift to the world. If we’re going to claim it’s a science, we have to start treating it like one and respecting the science behind it. That means being open to constant change and feedback, and accepting other data, even if we didn’t collect it ourselves. We are not the only ones who can measure things.
Insulting your clients is not a good look
I definitely get the anger and defensiveness that can come out when we first hear really serious criticisms of something we’re passionate about. This is especially true when these criticisms involve some pretty heinous stories of abuse and trauma. Again, what do you think you are offering when you attack and debase these victims or the allies supporting them?
There are more cries than ever before to get the Good Word of ABA out into the world and help people “understand” our worth. In that process though, we’ve continued to do even more harm. Being passionate about something doesn’t mean you get to deny others’ experiences with that thing, especially if those experiences were hurtful. It’s also a hard sell to say we want to help and we care about people when we then turn around and attack those same people on social media. Do you really want to help, or do you just want people to shut up and listen to you? Because those are very different things.
If we want to improve our reputations, we need to start listening.
Pull your head out of your ass and do better.