Introducing LADER: A Structured Approach to Effective Professional Interactions for Behavior Analysts

Abstract

Applied behavior analysis (ABA) is a human service profession using the science of behaviorism to promote meaningful changes in the lives of clients. However, misconceptions, misunderstandings, and false information have plagued our field since its inception and challenge the efficacy of our continued dissemination efforts. Effective science communication skills, especially for fields with a highly technical language such as ABA, promote marked improvements in client outcomes. Herein we introduce LADER, a structured and scaffolded approach to effective professional interactions for behavior analysts. The five components of LADER (listen, ask questions, determine misconceptions, engage, and reflect and evaluate) support analysts in navigating complex and potentially challenging conversations with clients, caregivers, collaborative professionals, and other stakeholders. The experiences and insights of current behavior professionals, and empirical research on effective science communication, underpins the components of LADER. Following a description of LADER, a hypothetical scenario provides readers with a vignette on how to apply LADER in practice.

Client outcomes have direct ties to how effectively a professional can communicate, especially within human services fields (e.g., Anderson et al., 2016; Vermeir et al., 2015). The more effective the communication skills a professional demonstrates, the better the clients’ outcomes (e.g., Berman & Chutka, 2016; McLeskey et al., 2017; Street et al., 2009). Many scientific disciplines contain a considerable amount of technical language which professionals must distill. Core aspects of effective scientific communication include the use of precise language to provide the most relevant content and the consideration and incorporation of audiences’ prior knowledge (Mercer-Mapstone & Kuchel, 2017). Successfully conveying technical, science-related information to various audiences reflects quality scientific training (Pelger & Nilsson, 2018).

Within educational and early intervention settings, communication and collaboration occurs across diverse stakeholders often during the development and implementation of an educational program for students with disabilities (McLeskey et al., 2017). Practitioners of applied behavior analysis (ABA), often working in schools and clinics, must communicate the scientific principles and rationale behind their programming and interventions to relevant stakeholders, including students, caregivers, teachers, and other related professionals. Effective communication supports ABA’s common goal of providing services to promote practical, socially valid outcomes, and aligns with our professional standards and guidelines (Baer et al., 1968; Wolf, 1978; Behavior Analysis Certification Board [BACB], 2020).

Behavior analysts, as with other science professionals, face communication challenges. ABA practitioners use technically precise language to conceptualize and describe procedures. The jargon-laden language of ABA can make dissemination and collaboration difficult (Lindsley, 1991). Communication challenges also can contribute to perpetuated misconceptions about ABA. For example, ABA techniques only work for children with autism, ABA has an extreme focus on punishment, and ABA often equates to bribery (e.g., Trump et al., 2018). Rather than hinder client outcomes or solidify misunderstandings, providing analysts a strong and effective communication repertoire can help identify and speak to misconceptions that may arise in practice.

Communicating Our Science: The LADER Tool

In the current article, we introduce a behavioral tool to establish, support, and maintain effective communication with collaborative stakeholders. The tool outlines specific communication behaviors, providing utility across professional domains. The basis for the tool is grounded in both the reported experiences and strategies of current behavior professionals, and research on effective communication. We conducted a survey of behavior professionals across a Mid-Atlantic state. Researchers emailed an IRB-approved Qualtrics survey to 1,009 behavior analysts through the Behavior Analyst Certification Board (BACB) Registry. Responding analyst demographics mirrored broad demographics of board certified behavior analysts (BCBAs) shared by the BACB (n.d.) and other behavior-analytic research surveys (e.g., Bayley et al., 2023; LeBlanc et al., 2020). Analysts answered open-ended questions about the attributes of high-quality behavior analysts, misconceptions about ABA they have encountered, and the strategies and discussion behaviors professionals utilize in response to such misconceptions.

Research team members with survey and qualitative research experience coded the data in an iterative process, first generating descriptive codes, then applying secondary pattern and axial coding (Miles et al., 2014; Saldaña, 2016). Response question datasets were analyzed independently for frequent themes and connections across themes and datasets. We then compared resulting themes to existing research on effective science communication (e.g., Mercer-Mapstone & Kuchel, 2017; Pelger & Nilsson, 2018), effective communication of ABA (e.g., Becirevic et al., 2016; Critchfield et al., 2017; Kelly et al., 2019; Lindsley, 1991), and effective professional interactions (e.g., Taylor et al., 2019). We identified key responses to support the development of our tool. Their inclusion in the article was based on their clarity and alignment with existing research. Specific data from our survey of analysts is available upon request to the first author. Responses of actively certified behavior analysts, integrated with existing knowledge of productive science communication and professional interactions, established the basis for the LADER (pronounced “ladder”) tool (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1.

The Five Main Components of LADER. Note. The main components of LADER are show in white boxes. Arrows connect the components of LADER, with double-headed arrows between several domains. The gray boxes (right) show the eight “engage” behaviors commonly used by analysts when engaging in professional interactions with others. An arrow is shown from “reflect and evaluate” to “listen,” signifying a return to the beginning of LADER when necessary

LADER provides a scaffolded approach to support behavior analytic professionals navigating the potentially challenging scenario of responding to the misconceptions of caregivers’ and other collaborative partners in real-time. Consisting of five components (Listen, Ask Questions, Determine Misconception, Engage, Reflect and Evaluate), the LADER tool supports behavior analysts’ navigation of difficult interactions with clients, families, education professionals, and other stakeholders. Attentive behavior professionals listen to their audience, ask open questions, determine the audiences’ misconception(s), engage in effective behaviors/strategies in response, and reflect and evaluate during and after the interaction. We begin by explaining the components of LADER, including support from current certified behavior analysts and existing research. Responses from survey participants are included throughout, highlighting the shared experiences and insights of certified behavior analysts. We then follow a hypothetical scenario in which Devin, a certified behavior analyst within a public-school setting, uses LADER to navigate several potentially challenging interactions with caregivers and other education professionals.

Listen

The leading component, Listen, emphasizes the need to first engage in active listening prior to providing any response or comment. Behavior analysts, like other professionals, sometimes enter into discussions with preconceived notions and solutions. Regardless of its validity, a preestablished mindset promotes inadvertently or even purposefully ignoring or dismissing information that deviates from the assumed outcome. Instead, behavior analysts must be “willing to listen to others and take their experiences and expertise into account” (Respondent 34). Avoid interrupting the speaker or engaging in other tasks while the speaker shares their concerns to convey both respect and dignity. “[Taking] the time to understand your client/audience” (R48) allows the analyst to “meet their priorities” (R13) and “support [them] in every step of their journey” (R37). Analysts should maintain attentive and engaged body language (e.g., nodding, uncrossed arms, smiling, leaning in) when listening to the speaker. Such “active listening” (R19) helps analysts “listen carefully to the questions being asked” (R33) and “assess [their audiences’] knowledge” (R44). “Listening to hear . . . [rather than] listening to respond” (Williams-Duncan, 2020, p. 19) can help analysts more fully understand the speaker’s comment/concern while demonstrating their dedication to collaboration (McNaughton et al., 2008). In addition, jotting down brief notes provides a permanent product allowing listeners to remain engaged and recall key messages the speaker conveys. Through active listening, analysts will not only be able to identify misconceptions, but will also engage more successfully in the subsequent steps of LADER.

Ask Questions

After listening to the speaker, analysts should ask follow-up questions to understand better the source and nature of the misconception(s). Questioning allows for a more thorough understanding of the specific misconception, especially if the analyst did not gather a complete understanding of the misconception during the Listen stage. Analysts should ask open-ended questions rather than simple “yes or no” questions that often fail to promote further conversation and information sharing. For example, asking teachers to discuss how a student is behaving in their classroom in relation to their peers will gain more insight than asking a closed-ended question such as, “Do they hit peers in the classroom? What about hitting teachers?” and so on. Open-ended questions and prompts invite the speaker to elaborate on their own experiences and perceptions. Such two-way dialogue (Mercer-Mapston & Kuchel, 2017) promotes both information and prospective sharing, establishing a positive environment critical for successful interactions.

The goal for the questions stage promotes an understanding of the full scope of the speakers’ misconception(s) and its background. Make sure counterparts feel comfortable speaking freely by allowing ample time to respond without interruption. In addition, questions should be posed in such a way that does not lead the respondent to feel there is a preferred or expected answer. Analysts should also identify additional adults who can provide additional information as necessary. Doing so ensures analysts “ask questions of all those that know the child” (R69). Avoiding accusing or otherwise aggressive questions further reduces the potential for the audience to become defensive. Firmly reflect on the information shared and offer summative or clarifying questions to indicate your active engagement in the conversation. Some potential open-ended questions for use within these conversations include:

• How did you come to believe. . . ?

• Can you please elaborate further?

• What experiences have you had that lead you to this belief?

• What made you feel this way?

Determine Misconceptions

Effectively Listening and Asking Questions minimizes negative conversational outcomes. Behavior analysts performing both behaviors do not assume a misconception cannot change and do not discount or minimize others’ complaints. Rather, the behavior analyst sets the stage for a deeper understanding of the misconception(s). Doing so allows the analyst to select the best engagement behavior(s) for their response. Some speakers may be very clear and upfront with their misconceptions. They may state, for example, “My child doesn’t have autism, so ABA won’t work for them.” Other speakers may keep their comments obscure or vague, hiding the true core of their misconceptions. They may drop the words, “taking away, aversive, negative” at various times during the review of a proposed behavior plan without stating formally that they believe ABA focuses on negative techniques. In these situations, behavior analysts should return to Listen and Ask Questions as many times as necessary until they feel confident they have identified the audiences’ misconception(s). Analysts can use open-ended prompts to gain more information to determine the specific misconception(s), such as, “can you tell me a little more?” Or, “can you give me an example of what you mean?”

After identifying the misconception, practitioners should ensure they are representing the misconception to the stakeholder accurately by repeating it back and making their assumptions explicit. For example, “What I think I hear you saying is [personal summary]. Is that correct?” In doing so, analysts ensure they adequately address the concerns.

Engage

Engage refers to a collection of skills and abilities analysts can rely on when attempting to address misconceptions of ABA. This step can involve any number of responses depending on the specific situation (Fig. 1). Analysts should tailor their engagement behaviors to their audiences’ response(s) and body language. Two foundational engagement behaviors, supported by survey respondents, should be adopted by all analysts while countering misconceptions: establish positive professional interactions and translate the jargon.

Establish Positive Professional Interactions

Positive professional interactions describe analysts’ active efforts to ensure exchanges remain respectful and productive at all times. Responding analysts highlighted the importance of “assessing and building upon prior knowledge” (R44) and “avoid[ing] arguments from theoretical positions” (R52). “Being respectful of other fields/opinions while maintaining a true behavioral approach” (R23) summarizes many analysts’ responses. Working collaboratively with other providers and stakeholders (R15, 17, 32, 54, 61, 62) communicates approachability (R19, 44), empathy (R10, 63), respect (R46, 93), and humility (R32, 34). This leads to the development of rapport amongst the team (R29). Relationship-building skills such as these can reduce imbalanced power dynamics and de-escalate tense professional interactions (Williams-Duncan, 2020), leading to improved family satisfaction, treatment adherence, and clinical outcomes (Taylor et al., 2019).

Positive professional interactions also build upon the behaviors already described in the Listen and Ask Questions stages of LADER. Active listening without interruption and clarifying questions help the audience feel engaged and supported. Open body language, including appropriate personal space, a welcoming stance and posture, etc. all communicate regard and empathy on behalf of the analyst. Behavior analysts require “a combination of dedication to hard science while working as part of a team that may have vastly different views. You must have the social skills to navigate the team dynamics and still hold true to the code of conduct/ethics” (R88).

Translate the Jargon

Previous research identifies the technical and often jargon-heavy language of behavior analysis as a key systemic barrier to dissemination efforts (e.g., Foxx, 1996; Hineline, 1980; Kelly et al., 2019). Thus, analysts engaging with clients, families, and others should limit technical jargon as much as possible. Responding analysts highlighted the need to use “simple” (R8) and “common” language (R11) to explain concepts that are “very intuitive if explained in everyday terms” (R21). Using “understandable, relatable terms” (R48) helps analysts connect with their audience through shared language. These responses mirror calls from behavioral researchers highlighting the implications of the complex vocabulary associated with the science of behavior analysis (Critchfield et al., 2017; Critchfield & Koepke, 2018; McMahon et al., 2021).

Translating technical jargon to accessible language helps practitioners apply ABA in practical settings and provide accessible explanations of ABA principles (Lindsley, 1991). Translation not only facilitates better emotional responses but can improve others’ understanding of our science (Becirevic et al., 2016; Critchfield et al., 2017; Rolider et al., 2009). Building analysts’ skills to pivot effectively between “technical” and “common” language while maintaining scientific precision is important. Doing so allows analysts to connect with individuals at their knowledge level, avoid “talking over their heads,” and communicate respect and a desire to converse rather than lecture.

The importance of translating behavior-analytic terminology was mentioned frequently by survey respondents:

• We need to be able to translate what we do in a way that is still scientifically accurate but also able to be easily understood by the general public. (R47)

• To better disseminate, we also have to speak THEIR language, not just ours, and translate our work in a way that others will be able to utilize in practice. (R88)

• I try to avoid using field-specific language while keeping the tenets intact. . . . Effective behavior analysts are able to translate the knowledge of the field to clients and other practitioners in understandable ways without coming across arrogant or unwilling to collaborate. (R92)

Effective translation represents a high-level skill requiring mastery of the content and ability to communicate clearly while maintaining scientific/technical accuracy. Translation skills encompass not only word choice and content, but also teaching and presentation strategies. Successful translations require behavior professionals to match the content they present to the audiences’ knowledge and skills. As relationships and knowledge progress, behavior professionals can then provide increasingly complex ideas and terminology.

The ability to engage in positive professional interactions while “dropping the jargon” (R9) sets a supportive foundation upon which analysts can begin providing their own perspectives and opinions. Although many analysts effectively translate our science to nonprofessionals, such translation skills may not exist within every analyst’s professional repertoire or may not be recognized as a responsibility of the analyst. Thus, analysts may require explicit instruction or training in developing these skills. Gaining such skills will likely require observing competent models and multiple opportunities to practice with feedback. Analysts should use each interaction as data to reflect upon:

• How effective were my translations?

• How were my translations received?

• Was I understood?

• Was the audience confused or required multiple explanations?

• Did I ramble or belabor a point?

Selecting Specific Engagement Behavior(s)

The following sections provide descriptions and evidence from responding certified behavior analysts regarding practices they use when addressing misconceptions of ABA. The engagement behavior include: (1) provide relatable examples; (2) explain concepts and/or principles; (3) highlight various areas of professional emphasis; (4) describe rationale and/or social validity; (5) teach and model; and (6) discuss results, benefits, and evidence. Analysts should tailor their selection of response topographies to those few behaviors they believe will best help inform their audience of their own perspective.

Provide Relatable Examples

Illustrative examples serve as powerful tools to convey the often technical language of behavior analysis. Relatable examples capitalize on the audiences’ own personal experiences, allowing them to make connections with the information. Providing examples related and tailored to the audience allows analysts to make connections with the audiences’ lived experiences. Nearly one-quarter of responding analysts mentioned using relatable examples when discussing ABA, indicating it is a commonly relied upon strategy:

• I also try to present examples of how it may work in their everyday life so they see the application of the science. (R21)

• I have many preloaded simple examples of common behavior analytic principles that I use to relate with my audience. (R48)

• I also use real-life examples that could help the person understand. If it's a guardian to the client, I use an example of the client/student. If I am discussing with a peer or co-worker, I use examples using myself or my family members. (R53)

• I use everyday examples (e.g., kids, pets) to illustrate the principles at work. (R96)

Explain Concepts and/or Principles

An important skill for any behavior analyst is the ability to explain concepts or principles with varying levels of detail. This is where analysts’ translation skills come into play. Analysts should work to tailor their responses based on the audiences’ ABA knowledge. For example, you could explain a concept and its foundational underpinnings in more specific language to a clinic colleague than to a clients’ family member. Survey respondents discussed the importance of tailoring information when discussing ABA:

• Help people from other disciplines and families understand the basic concepts of what we are doing and why. (R70)

• [We] have to understand the terms, interventions, principles but also understand how to explain those to people not in the field. . . . I have spent a lot of time, however, talking to peers in my current work setting using less of the technical jargon and more basic clear explanation of what we are doing. (R72)

• I tailor the way I discuss ABA to the audience and what I think would be most helpful/effective for them. (R73)

• [Analysts need] knowledge of the science but able to explain it in layman’s terms to the educational team so all on the team, especially parents, can understand what is expected and try to replicate treatment plans in the home. (R79)

Highlight Various Areas of Professional Emphasis

Behavior analysts work across a wide variety of professional emphases, from education to businesses and organizations, brain injury rehabilitation to parent and caregiver training. The general public, however, associates ABA services primarily with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) or individuals with “problematic” behaviors or those “in crisis” (R77). As a result, analysts should maintain an awareness of, and ability to talk about, the full range of professional emphasis in which certified behavior analysts work. Responding analysts highlighted ABA as “a diverse field with practitioners focusing on a variety of areas of daily living, addictions, businesses, and medical disorders,” (R33) and “not just for individuals with autism” (R89).

Describe Rationale and/or Social Validity

Others’ opposition to ABA may develop from a lack of understanding regarding how and why behaviors are selected for intervention. Although a focus on socially valid (e.g., important) behaviors is a defining characteristic of ABA, nonpractitioners may not see or understand the rationale for selection of specific behaviors: “Recently, I have put more of a focus on talking about the social validity of what I am doing and why we are targeting certain behaviors and not others” (R72); “I emphasize that we address areas of social significance to the client as well as the family” (R33). As analysts, it is our job to convey clearly our thinking and reasoning: “I describe what I am doing and why” (R34); “I try to give the rationale for interventions'' (R59).

Teach and Model

Beyond explaining, analysts should pursue opportunities to teach explicitly and/or model the concepts in question. Teaching others the terminology and principles of ABA extends the audiences’ understanding. It also provides an avenue through which analysts can build upon their translation skills: “I often use the technical language and teach people what these terms mean” (R67); “[I] translate technical terms into everyday language but also, as part of the process, teach the technical language so that eventually verbal interactions are more precise and concise” (R85). In addition, responding analysts highlighted the importance of teaching those inside and outside of our professional circles. Disseminating ABA and addressing misconceptions of our science requires analysts to educate and inform others at the individual, group, and community levels: “our department also does trainings with the staff to help with the understanding” (R26); “community training” (R91). Consistent with the foundations behaviors discussed in Establish Positive Professional Interactions, analysts should ensure they “teach others in a way that does not make them feel like they are doing everything wrong” (R44).

Modeling skills and techniques are another powerful tool available to analysts because, "‘showing them’ is almost always more effective than trying to explain” (R52). Models can act as prompts, an instructional technique commonly used by behavior analysts when working with clients. Modeling allows the audience to see positive exemplars of intervention delivery and its impact on the client or environment. In addition, effective behavior analysts, “need to get their ‘hands dirty’ and work directly with a client to determine effective interventions and train others” (R34). One extended response from an analyst highlights how teaching and models can cultivate new skills in colleagues and caregivers:

It is important to not only tell people what to do, but to show them. Providing a model of practice is important. I avoid being the dude with the clipboard and rather be the guy who is willing to do what I am asking others to do. Of course, modeling does lead to then translating the model into replicable actions (via notes, protocol write ups, etc.) on the part of the folks with whom I am working. (R85)

Discuss Results, Benefits, and Evidence

Due to circumstances outside of our control, the public at-large may not have learned about the positive results or benefits gained by individuals receiving ABA services. Explicitly discussing the impact ABA-based interventions have had on actual individuals is a powerful way to highlight a main reason many analysts stay in the field: seeing the positive outcomes achieved by their clients and others (e.g., Coy & Russell, 2020). Responding analysts highlighted sharing their own “positive experiences” (R56) with others: “I describe how the field of ABA is changing lives including my own” (R89). Respondents also mentioned the benefit of “focusing on the positive outcomes ABA can provide for the variety of individuals and areas we serve” (R68).

Discussing ABA as “data-driven and based on research” (R69) can also support analysts’ efforts to highlight the positive impacts for clients. The investigative and iterative nature of ABA allows researchers and practitioners to identify effective strategies and collect high-quality data on baseline responding and subsequent behavior change. Current analysts “talk about [ABA] as being the most evidence-based intervention in the field of autism” (R27), and “explain that [ABA] is research driven” (R59).

Reflect and Evaluate

After Engaging with the stakeholder and “providing them information, from a professional standpoint, to help them understand more” (R35), analysts should take time to reflect on the interaction. Reflection typically occurs following the interaction, but periodic moments of self-reflection during the conversation can prove beneficial. Critical self-reflection following meetings or discussions of ABA could focus on: (1) what worked well; (2) what descriptions or explanations made sense to the audience; (3) the availability of data and/or other empirical support for decision making; or (4) the need for clearer information or additional discussions. Reflecting on current and past experiences allows behavior analysts to learn from such events and improve their daily practice.

Evaluating the content and delivery of your responses provide ample ground for reflection. Consider the clarity of your message, paying specific attention to your vocal and body language. Review the jargon or other technical language you used and how it was received (see Translate the Jargon, above). Take note of additional possible misconceptions revealed to you during the conversation and identify the need for revisiting a discussion point within the current or a future interaction. Returning to a discussion ensures mutual comprehension and can proactively address potential misconceptions in the future. In summation, the ability of behavior analysts “to critically evaluate our own decision-making process . . . is paramount” (R32).

Applying the LADER Tool: Devin’s Story

We now present an illustrative scenario in which a school-based behavior analyst, Devin, uses the LADER tool (Fig. 1) to support communication and collaboration across multiple professional interactions. Although meant to be hypothetical, we believe many analysts can relate with Devin’s experiences. We present an interrelated and on-going set of interactions that shows one application of LADER from start to finish. We recognize, however, that LADER is a cyclical process requiring flexibility across varied scenarios. In addition, behavior analysts often work with clients, caregivers, and other professional colleagues for several months to years. Therefore, the implementation of LADER may occur over extended periods of time.

Devin’s story begins with background information, and then follows them as they navigate difficult professional conversations with a students’ parents, teacher, and related service professional. Following the scenario, we show how Devin uses LADER to support and guide these interactions. Upon entering the Engage phase, Devin purposefully selects specific practices they believe will best serve their interaction and help inform their audience, the specifics of which are shared following some background context.

Devin Data works as a BCBA responsible for supporting students and teachers within a public school district. An assistant principal asked Devin to attend an upcoming IEP planning meeting for Peyton, a student in the district. During the meeting, members of the IEP team (classroom teacher, special education teacher, and several related service professionals) raised concerns about Peyton’s new challenging behaviors. Members of the team said Peyton recently began to “call out, whine, and complain throughout the day,” with Peyton’s parents noting these behaviors are also increasing at home.

Devin knew from previous experience that discussions addressing students’ challenging behavior in schools can be a difficult process. They review LADER prior to the meeting, reflecting upon their previous efforts to discuss ABA with nonpractitioners. This preparation and reflection help Devin enter the meeting feeling confident in their abilities. Devin introduces themself and provides a quick description of their role as a behavior analyst in the district. Devin explains that given the reported frequency of these behaviors and their interference with Peyton’s learning, a Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA) could help the team gather more information about the behaviors and determine some next steps. Devin shared a jargon-free description of the FBA process. In particular, Devin explained that the process involved focused observations to better understand the student’s behavior. By understanding what happens before and after the behavior, Devin explained the team can modify the environment to teach, support, and maintain positive behaviors. They also provided the parents with an informational packet to take home. While describing the process, Devin highlighted the use of various data collection methods to understand better Peyton’s behavior and the conditions under which the behaviors occur. Devin ends the overview with a discussion of a resulting Positive Behavior Support Plan (PBSP) and its potential benefits at school and home.

Peyton’s parents agreed to the FBA/PBSP process, allowing data collection efforts to begin. Devin was invited to observe Peyton in class over the next few weeks. During a follow-up call, Devin asked the parents to share any questions or concerns they had regarding the FBA process and Peyton’s behavior. Mom replied that they both just wanted to make sure Peyton has as much success in school as possible. “However,” Mom continued, “I have concerns that ABA can’t help solve Peyton’s problems. It’s only for students with autism or dangerous behaviors, right? I did some reading online about ABA and FBAs and everything was in relation to autism or severe emotional disturbances. That’s not our Peyton. She’s not in crisis.”

After talking with Peyton’s parents and addressing their concerns, Devin continues along the FBA process and contacts Peyton’s classroom teacher, Mrs. Smith, to schedule in-person observations. Mrs. Smith was eager for the support and invited Devin to observe during upcoming math lessons because, “that’s when Peyton has had a lot of problems lately.”

After observing Peyton’s behavior during math, Devin and Mrs. Smith have an opportunity to speak privately about Peyton. Mrs. Smith details her recent efforts to help Peyton but raises concerns about the ultimate outcome of “all this work.” She continued, “I remember ABA from my introductory psychology classes and did some internet searching. Everything I saw was students in small restrictive classrooms responding to flash cards at a desk. Peyton does fine academically and socially, but just can’t seem to control her own body sometimes. I don’t want to see her lose those skills by only working one-on-one. And I really don’t want a little robot all around my room.”

Devin collects more data on Peyton’s behavior over the next 2 weeks. Prior to writing the FBA, Devin reaches out to Mr. Daniels, a related service professional on Peyton’s IEP team. Devin starts the conversation by thanking Mr. Daniels for his time and providing a broad overview of what they observed in Mrs. Smith’s classroom over the past few weeks. Devin provides a concise operational definition of Peyton’s challenging behavior, frequency data on its occurrence, and a functional hypothesis statement. Devin asks Mr. Daniels for his thoughts and input on what was shared and how to address Peyton’s behaviors.

Mr. Daniels agrees Peyton’s behaviors have become a challenge both inside and outside the classroom. “However,” he continues, “I haven’t seen ABA be used in a way that helps kids. It’s just so mean and only works because you punish them. If that doesn’t work, you bribe the kids with candy all day to get them to do what you want.”

Listen

Devin understood the importance of demonstrating respect and attention to their audience as the foundation of LADER. Throughout the interactions, Devin ensured their body language conveyed active listening by nodding and maintaining eye-contact. While talking to Peyton’s parents, Devin jotted down notes to ensure they responded to each concern. Later, Devin took a few moments to reflect after listening to Mrs. Smith, Peyton’s classroom teacher, share her concerns of the impact of ABA services. This allowed Devin the opportunity to ensure they fully understood what Mrs. Smith was saying and adjust their response accordingly. Mr. Daniels’s opinions on the impact of ABA caught Devin off-guard and they worked hard to avoid reactionary responding, body language, and facial expressions.

Ask Questions

Through active and intentional listening, it was clear to Devin that Peyton’s parents spent time doing internet searching around ABA and the FBA process. Devin followed-up by asking, “What types of websites did you find that lead you to the belief that ABA is only for autism or severe crisis behavior?” Peyton’s mother shared that she found and read a few blog posts in which the authors and commenters went back-and-forth on the ABA services their children received. Devin continued this conversation by asking if Peyton’s parents had ever heard of other areas in which behavior analysts typically work. Their responses let Devin know that Peyton’s parents needed more information about the different populations and areas in which behavior analysts utilize ABA to benefit clients.

Later while speaking with Mrs. Smith about Peyton, she tells Devin she does not want “little robots'' all around her classroom or to have Peyton “in small restrictive classrooms responding to flash cards at a desk.” After thanking Mrs. Smith for speaking so candidly, Devin asked several open-ended questions to gain more information. Devin asked Mrs. Smith to share her experiences that formed this opinion. As a newer teacher, Mrs. Smith shares that she has not had a student receive ABA services within her classroom before and that she based this opinion on conversations with colleagues and information she found online. Devin believes they can describe how behavior professionals typically proceed through the evaluation and determination of service delivery and modality in a child-focused manner.

Mr. Daniels’s responses made it clear to Devin that he had strong opinions about ABA. To understand that better, Devin asked Mr. Daniels to explain what firsthand experiences formed these opinions. Devin knew they would be better suited to address his misconceptions if they had more information about the origin of such misunderstandings. Devin also asked Mr. Daniels to describe any situation(s) in which he has seen ABA services support gains in important behaviors. Gaining more information through questioning positioned Devin to respond.

Determine Misconceptions

Knowing everyone they interact with has a unique set of personal and professional experiences in relation to ABA, Devin handled each professional interaction separately. Devin worked to not let any prior conversations with others, or their own assumptions, influence future interactions. The prior steps of LADER (Listen, Ask questions) supported Devin in their ability to identify the misconception(s) of held by Peyton’s parents, Mrs. Smith, and Mr. Daniels. Peyton’s parents believed ABA was only for ASD or individuals in “crisis.” Mrs. Smith assumed ABA services were only provided in restrictive settings and services would lead to “robotic” behaviors. Mr. Daniels perceived ABA service delivery as overly punishing and reliant upon “bribes.”

Engage

Having identified the misconceptions of each audience, Devin planned the engagement behaviors they would utilize in their response. Devin understood the importance of positively engaging with nonpractitioners within all professional interactions while translating the jargon of ABA. Devin recognized internal feelings of confusion and defensiveness when speaking with Peyton’s parents. Despite this, Devin understood the importance and value of letting Peyton’s parents fully explain their point of view. Doing so established mutual respect and positive professional interactions between them. Devin enjoyed talking to Peyton’s parents about ABA. Devin was cognizant of the language they used and worked hard to ensure they did not overwhelm Peyton’s parents with technical terminology. Devin used words like “triggers” or “things that occur just before Peyton’s behavior” instead of “antecedents.” They paired the common and technical terms together while showing an example antecedent—behavior—consequence data collection form. Devin continued to translate between general and specific terminology as they gauged the parents’ understanding.

Devin felt upset while listening to Mrs. Smith describe her belief that ABA leads to students becoming “little robots.” While continuing to engage in active listening, Devin checked in on their own body language and posture, making subtle changes to reflect openness and engagement toward Mrs. Smith. Devin also recognized that offering long descriptions of differences between discrete trial teaching and natural environment training would not be the best way to engage with Mrs. Smith. Instead, Devin described the range of service delivery models used by behavior professionals. They explained that quality ABA service delivery includes focused intervention packages based on student goals and learning needs. Devin also worked hard to communicate with a shared common language during all interactions with Mrs. Smith.

Devin recognized the importance of collaboration and humility when interacting with other educational professionals. Rapport and respect are the foundation of all effective professional interactions. Devin made connections to Mr. Daniels’s professional discipline, “I focus on inclusive service delivery focused on the same ultimate goal of child independence and success.” Devin avoided describing the range of conditioned and unconditioned reinforcers considered when delivering ABA services. Instead, they took time to describe the role events following behaviors (consequences) play in the future likelihood of the same behavior. They further described that, “generally, humans use behavior to gain access to something pleasant/preferred or to avoid or escape from something unpleasant/unpreferred. Behavior analysts use this information to attempt to capitalize on such motivations to promote the acquisition of important behaviors.” Devin proactively scaffolded their descriptions and language. In doing so, Devin began with easily understood terminology that could be elevated through latter conversations.

Provide Relatable Examples

Devin believed Mrs. Smith would respond positively to the parallels between ABA service delivery models and teaching broadly. Devin explained that like general education teachers, behavior analysts work to determine the best learning environment and strategies for their students. “This means we work to take the students’ unique learning needs, goals, preferences, and styles into consideration when designing treatment packages,” Devin continued. “Given that Peyton seems to struggle behaviorally in math class without academic concerns, we could work to embed service time and behavioral supports during that subject.” Mrs. Smith was appreciative of the example Devin provided and seemed eager to begin their collaboration.

Explain Concepts and/or Principles

Devin has had the opportunity to work with many families entering the FBA process. This allowed them multiple chances to practice and refine their translation and explanation skills. While talking with Peyton’s parents, Devin put conscious effort into making sure they explained the concepts associated with the FBA process clearly and concisely.

Devin also altered their communication style and level of depth based on feedback from Mr. Daniel’s vocal and body language. For example, Devin noticed Mr. Daniels asked more questions and showed a confused expression when Devin used more technical verbiage. After noticing this pattern, Devin paused the conversation to explain the concept in clearer language. Devin’s clarifications made sense to Mr. Daniels and the conversation continued.

Highlight Various Areas of Professional Emphasis

Devin quickly became aware of Peyton’s parents' misunderstanding about the scope of fields in which behavior analysts work. During a brief yet in-depth conversation with Peyton’s parents, Devin provided examples of different disciplines within which behavior analysts embed the principles of ABA to support their varied clients. Peyton’s parents seemed surprised to learn that behavior analysts use the same set of foundational understandings in their work in sports/fitness, injury rehabilitation, and gerontology.

Devin also engaged in conversations with Mrs. Smith regarding the diverse types of educational settings in which behavior analysts support students. These conversations expanded Mrs. Smith's understanding of the wide scope of locations in which analysts apply behavior analytic principles. Talk of different educational environments helped Devin show a side of ABA service delivery Mrs. Smith had not seen in her online research and educational training.

Describe Rationale and/or Social Validity

While speaking with Peyton’s family and teachers, Devin made sure to communicate clearly the reasoning behind the need for additional support for Peyton. “Given the increase you’ve seen in Peyton’s calling out, whining, and complaining behaviors, I believe we can find strategies to help Peyton become more independent and less disruptive in the classroom. By working as a team, we all can work together to help Peyton, her parents, and her teachers.” In a follow-up call, Peyton’s parents described their appreciation for Devin’s efforts to explain the rationale for their treatment plan. Peyton’s mother thanked Devin for making her feel fully involved and heard in the FBA process.

Teach and Model

Following a conversation with Mr. Daniels, Devin more fully described how behavior analysts conceptualize and take advantage of consequences when attempting to build/reduce behaviors. Devin felt confident Mr. Daniels was open to this conversation given Devin’s previous efforts to establish a positive professional environment between them. Devin modeled how an analyst could use commonly occurring consequences to glean information for an intervention plan: “For example, if a student calls out and runs up to the teacher every time an independent activity is assigned, they might be attempting to gain access to teacher attention. Knowing this is likely to happen for independent activities in the future, we could implement some strategies which may decrease the value of teacher attention, such as transitioning the activity to small groups or pairs. We could also provide prompts or warnings about the upcoming independent work time to the student, so they are aware of what is forthcoming and provide them the opportunity to gain some teacher attention prior to the solo work.” Mr. Daniels was receptive to this thorough illustrative example and seemed more engaged to support Peyton’s future behavior plan.

Discuss Results, Benefits, and Evidence

Devin felt confident Mrs. Smith and Mr. Daniels would find benefit in the results-oriented outlook of behavior analysis. They discussed the use of strategies or interventions based on solid experimental research. They also talked about the use of objective observation and quality data collection to monitor how Peyton's behavior changes in response to the addition of interventions. Both Mrs. Smith and Mr. Daniels responded positively to this discussion—they appreciated the inclusion of evidence-based practices and appeared excited to see what could be done to best help Peyton.

Reflect and Evaluate

During and following each conversation, Devin made sure to reflect on their communicative clarity and responsiveness. They reflected on each interaction and noted instances in which understanding, or confusion resulted from their descriptions. Upon reflection, Devin was pleased with their ability to notice their body language during interactions and making subtle changes to maintain open body language. Devin recognized their interactions would have been better supported with visuals or other materials. They collected FBA and data collection forms as well as visuals and charts from their ABA coursework, placing the materials in their notebook for the future. Devin made notes to reconnect with Peyton’s parents, Mrs. Smith, and Mr. Daniels in a few weeks to see if they had any questions or concerns.

Special Considerations

Cultural awareness and responsiveness are key skills necessary for 21^st-century behavior analysts (Čolić et al., 2022; Fong et al., 2016; Gatzunis et al., 2022). The BACB’s Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts also emphasizes the importance of cultivating skills related to cultural responsiveness and diversity (BACB, 2020). Thus, differences in cultural norms and linguistic traditions must be considered when implementing LADER. For example, some cultural norms may emphasize the importance of eye contact in discussions, whereas other cultures may see eye contact as disrespectful. Such differences affect how analysts engage. Cultural and linguistic differences can also affect a practitioner’s choice of relatable examples, and rationale for social validity.

Consideration must also be given to the communication skills and abilities of the conversants. For example, translators and/or sign language interpreters can be involved in the LADER process. Although adding in skilled translators and interpreters can be invaluable to bridge communication differences, additional steps within the communication process necessitate additional time and planning to ensure communication aligns with the principles of LADER. The communication repertoires of the individuals involved in the process should influence the analysts’ word choice, pacing, and presentation methods.

It is important to note that LADER is not a process for obtaining client consent and assent for therapeutic treatment. Ethical guidelines of professional organizations, such as the American Psychological Association ([APA] 2016), and the National Association of School Psychologists ([NASP] 2021), recommend seeking assent to treatment. The Ethical Code for Behavior Analysts requires consent and assent, when applicable, to be obtained (2.11; BACB, 2020). Assent should be obtained prior to engaging in LADER. For recent writing on consent and assent in the context of ABA, see Breaux and Smith (2023), Flowers and Dawes (2023), and Morris et al. (2021).

Brief Limitations and Future Research

Although LADER draws from research-based practices for communication and the experiences of participants in our survey, the tool has not been evaluated as a package with respect to its efficacy and impact on treatment acceptability. Such work would provide critical insight into the impact of the process on caregiver understandings, treatment acceptability, social validity, and other related outcomes. In addition, some recommendations, such as those to limit the use of jargon, are being currently debated (Normand & Donohue, 2022). Future research on implementation and efficacy of LADER may consider comparing key components of the model, such as using jargon-free language, to determine disparate effects and active ingredients. Research may also illuminate common barriers to implementation of LADER, such as irreconcilable differences in perspectives and/or the need for multiple cycles of LADER.

Conclusion

The field of applied behavior analysis has a long-standing “image problem” (Doughty et al., 2012, p. 116). Although behavioral researchers have drawn attention to this issue and its potential implications for the field (e.g., Morris, 1985, 2014), misconceptions about the field and scientific discipline of behavior analysis persist (e.g., Bellon-Harn et al., 2022). Herein we present LADER, a structured discussion scaffold to empower behavior analysts in addressing misconceptions of ABA in real-time. Effective interactions with nonbehavioral professionals and others develop and deepen when analysts listen to their audience, ask purposeful questions, determine the audiences’ misconception(s), engage in effective behaviors/strategies in response, and reflect and evaluate the conversation.

LADER supports behavior analysts to build positive and proactive relationships with various collaborative partners. Given the common role of analysts to support behavior change in adults supporting children and others, establishing and maintaining effective relationships is paramount. The circular nature of LADER promotes analysts to consider all interactions with others as data points for reflection and evaluation. Doing so can help analysts refine their communicative skills and interact effectively from the beginning of new interactions.

Given the current exponential growth of certified analysts (BACB, 2023), interpersonal professional interactions may be a key opportunity for analysts to address and discuss concerns or misconceptions about behavior analysis. Professional interactions grounded in empathy and compassion may increase a consumer’s motivation to engage in discussions about their misconceptions. It is important to note, however, that we should not assume all certified analysts will have adequate training and support to navigate these potentially fraught interactions. Such skills need to be developed and fostered by individual analysts during training and continued professional development.

It is important for our discipline, collectively and individually, to reflect on the mechanisms through which misconceptions of our science have developed and proliferated. First, people may encounter inaccurate descriptions in public information, popular-press authors (for example, see behavioral responses to Alfie Kohn in Doughty et al., 2012, and Reitman, 1998), and social media. Second, individuals may come upon poor or inaccurate representations of behavior analysis within academic textbooks (see Kestner & Flora, 1995), lectures (see Morris, 2009), and other primary and secondary sources (see Todd & Morris, 1992). Third, the technical information people encounter may not be meaningful enough to change their opinions or beliefs. Jargon and/or technical descriptions of intervention components may evoke negative emotional responses due to perceived complexity or unacceptability (Becirevic et al., 2016). Fourth, they had poor experiences or interactions with behavior professionals (Taylor et al., 2019), potentially including noncertified practitioners.

Within our own discussions with analysts, negative experiences with behavior professionals have long-standing effects on how people view the science of behavior analysis. Relationship skills and compassionate care in behavior analysis remains an important but neglected area of focus in behavior analytic training (Taylor et al., 2019). Interpersonal skills, such as the ability to compromise, consider and incorporate parent and client concerns, and clearly communicate rationale and procedures (Taylor et al., 2019), may be impeded by unclarified misconceptions about ABA or specific procedures. As a result, flexible and tailored dissemination efforts that take into consideration the learning history of the person, as well as the function of those misconceptions, can identify effective strategies for changing inaccurate views (Critchfield, 2014).

Thirty-five years ago, Morris (1985) issued the following emotional appeal to our field:

The dissemination of explicit, accurate, and unbiased information . . . constitutes an important new undertaking for the field of behavior analysis. Indeed, the political and financial exigencies of the 1980’s, and beyond, almost demand that a more active and systematic stance be taken. If a scientific community does not arrange for contingencies that assure its survival, then so much the worse for that community, and the rest of the culture at large. (p. 108)

Morris’ point was echoed nearly 20 years by Staddon’s (2004) aptly titled call to arms:

We are in trouble not because behaviorism is wrong, but because we have drawn our wagons into a circle and now speak—and shoot—mainly at one another rather than at the wide world outside. Self-criticism is great, but critical misrepresentation by non-behaviorists requires more. It is time to take [misrepresentations] seriously—to respond to them, rather than ignoring them in the vain hope that truth unaided will prevail. (p. 118)

We as a field continue to need to do more to actively address the rampant misconceptions of our science. Misconceptions will not change without an active effort from all certified behavior professionals, students, researchers, instructors, and program staff. Continued work with on-the-ground professionals is important for us as a growing field. The future of behavior analysis depends on current professionals identifying and recruiting future analysts, supporting them through training programs, and preparing them as ABA ambassadors. To do this, we must prepare behavior professionals with the tools to address misconceptions, and training on effective professional interactions with colleagues from other disciplines and the public at-large.

Funding

Funding for the underlying study was provided by the Student-Faculty Research Grant, School of Education, University of Pittsburgh.

Data Availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no relevant financial or nonfinancial conflicts of interest to disclose.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee (University of Pittsburgh Institutional Review Board) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.