The case for praxics.
Call the field 'praxics' to cut philosophical baggage and show we are a stand-alone science.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Schmitt (1984) wrote a theory paper. He said the field should drop the name 'behaviorism.' He wanted a new label: 'praxics.' The goal was to show we are a science, not a philosophy or part of psychology.
What they found
The paper did not test people. It argued that the word 'behaviorism' ties us to old fights. A new name would let the science stand on its own.
How this fits with other research
Ribes-Iñesta (1999) took the idea further. He said philosophy itself should become a verbal behavioral science. This extends the 1984 call for a clean split.
Dougan (1992) used the same spirit but aimed it at schools. He said we already have a ready-made science of teaching; we just need to sell it. This applies the re-brand to education.
Hayes (1991) pushed the other way. He defended the name 'radical behaviorism' and explained its roots. This looks like a fight, but it is not. C wanted to keep the name and clarify the philosophy; R wanted to drop the name and leave philosophy behind.
Why it matters
The paper asks you to pick a side: keep the old flag or make a new one. If you feel tired of explaining 'we are not Skinner boxes,' try saying 'I practice praxics, the science of behavior.' See if conversations move faster.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Test the word 'praxics' in one email or team meeting and note any change in reaction.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Since the early 1900s a variety of names has been proposed for the scientific study of behavior, but none has come into general use. "Praxics," a recent entry, is defensible on several grounds. "Behaviorism," on the other hand, is the name of a school of philosophy. Though praxics has roots in behaviorism, the term "behaviorism" should not be applied to praxics. Confusion between the science and the philosophy has retarded the growth of the science immeasurably. Its growth has also been impeded by its association with psychology, which is still primarily the study of mind. Efforts are underway to establish praxics as an independent field.
The Behavior analyst, 1984 · doi:10.1007/BF03391894