A Tactful Prompt: The Time is Right for Critical Behavioral Studies
Formal critical and neurodiversity training is overdue; start by co-planning goals with autistic voices today.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Jackson-Perry et al. (2025) wrote a position paper. They say the field needs a new space called Critical Behavioral Studies.
The space would train behavior analysts to think about history, power, and neurodiversity. Autistic advocates would help design the training.
What they found
The paper does not give new data. It argues that without critical self-reflection, ABA will keep facing public distrust.
The authors claim formal classes and joint research with autistic scholars can fix the advocacy gap.
How this fits with other research
McComas et al. (2025) extend this call. They give a ready-to-use ableism audit so you can start the reform today.
Mathur et al. (2022) is a predecessor. Their cultural-responsiveness curriculum opened the door for the deeper neurodiversity lens Jackson-Perry now urges.
Napolitano et al. (2025) is topically related. They want policy advocacy added to our job description, showing the same push to widen BCBA roles beyond clinic walls.
Why it matters
You can’t wait for a new degree program. Start small: invite an autistic speaker to your next team meeting, swap one goal from “eye contact” to “self-advocacy,” and read the ableism checklist from McComas et al. (2025). These moves bring Critical Behavioral Studies into your practice right now.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one client goal and ask the autistic learner or advocate how they would word it.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Feelings have long run high between many autistic advocates and behavior analysts. The former often experience and perceive ABA as harmful and traumatic in its methods, and prejudicial and stigmatizing in its objectives, with some of the latter retorting that criticisms reflect misunderstandings of the science rather than areas of true concern. The result? A deep and contentious conceptual divide, leaving little room for dialogue or progress. Recent months, though, have seen a tentative shift. Alongside recognition that behavioral interventions are so deeply entrenched that they are here to stay, some critical autism scholars are gingerly initiating public conversations with behavioral practitioners in a spirit of taking a pragmatic approach to meaningful reform. Further, a new generation of behavior analysts—including some autistic practitioners—is emerging, recognizing problems in their field, and considering how to address them. Interest in such developments is spreading and signals an opportunity for behavior analysts to follow other academic and advocate communities that recognize the importance of interdisciplinarity and critical self-reflection to evolve as a field. We—an interdisciplinary team of critical autism, neurodiversity, and behavior analysis scholars—feel that formalizing a broad field for scholars and practitioners sharing these ambitions holds potential. This field—let’s call it Critical Behavioral Studies—would favor profound social, cultural, and historical understanding, a commitment to extend the scope of training to better contextualize practice in relation to the group served, and the self-examination that would bring meaningful change to the field.
Perspectives on Behavior Science, 2025 · doi:10.1007/s40614-025-00472-2