Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
In recent years, public concerns about applied behavior analysis (ABA) have intensified. This article argues that foundational principles of ABA require behavior analysts to take seriously these concerns and actively work to improve our practices. We provide an overview of ongoing reform efforts and examine how these efforts have led to the emergence of distinct brands within the field. Although these reformist efforts signal a commitment to ethical progress, they also raise concerns about the proliferation of competing credentials, conferences, and professional affiliations, which could increase confusion among clients, practitioners, and policymakers. We argue that although branding within ABA may be an expected and ultimately benign response to shifting ethical and practical norms, it also carries the potential to faction reformist efforts and further divide the field, rather than promote our collective advancement toward ever-better practices. Thus, our goals are to: (1) raise awareness around the potentialities of siloing advancements under competing labels, and (2) suggest that an integrated approach synthesizing reformist insights into a cohesive framework may have the greatest impact on advancing the whole field's understanding of best practice.
Graber et al. (Wed,) studied this question.