Comments on cognitive science in the experimental analysis of behavior.

Morris et al. (1982) wrote a position paper. They told behavior analysts to keep cognitive words out of their work.

The authors said words like "memory" or "attention" add no useful action. They said only environmental events should guide us.

The paper found no new data. It argued that cognitive science offers nothing testable.

Stay with observable environment-behavior links, they said. That route is clearer and more useful.

Barrett (2016) updates the same warning. She says "brain-as-computer" talk is just new paint on old mentalism.

Furrebøe et al. (2017) carry the idea to behavioral economics. They show how operant methods can replace stories about "irrational minds.

Martens et al. (1989) seems to soften the stance. That later paper urges teamwork with behavioral biologists, showing the field later opened to allied data while still keeping mental terms out.

When you write plans or train staff, skip mental words. Say "deliver praise right after the response" instead of "give feedback to build self-esteem.

This habit keeps treatment clear, measurable, and tied to things you can actually change.