The Crossroads (Part 2) | BCBA CEU | Supervision | 0.5 Hour

In this second part of the presentation, the speaker focuses on how behavior analysts can combat the use of “fad,” anti-scientific, and pseudoscientific treatments. The speaker states that the field is at a “crossroads” regarding whether to prioritize science and evidence-based practice or justify non-evidence-based interventions. Proposed actions include improving understanding of functional control, strengthening knowledge of science versus pseudoscience, and increasing critical thinking across credential levels.

A mock example called “chocolate therapy” is used to illustrate the importance of skepticism and functional analysis. The speaker clarifies that the example and data were fabricated to demonstrate how easily misleading conclusions can be drawn without critical thinking.

The speaker expands the definition of harm beyond physical and emotional harm to include wasted time. Time spent on non-evidence-based interventions is described as harmful because it reduces access to effective treatment. The presentation criticizes eclectic approaches and argues that research does not support combining ineffective treatments with ABA.

Additional recommendations include improving articulation of evidence-based practice, strengthening ethical enforcement, rejecting false dichotomies between humility and science, clarifying personal and professional values, using proactive and reactive strategies when collaborating with teams, conducting risk–benefit analyses (including time), and providing higher-quality, naturalistic, engaging ABA services. The speaker concludes that standing up for science is necessary to maximize outcomes and help learners reach their potential.