By Matt Harrington, BCBA · Behaviorist Book Club · Research-backed answers for behavior analysts
The Critchfield et al. study (published in Behavior Analysis in Practice, 2017) systematically assessed the emotional responses that common behavior analytic terms elicit in people without behavior analytic training. Using normative ratings from non-expert participants, the researchers found that many standard technical terms in behavior analysis — including words used routinely in clinical documentation and family communication — reliably evoke negative emotional responses. Terms carrying colloquial connotations of harm, control, or punishment were rated particularly negatively, even when their technical behavior analytic meanings are neutral or positive. The study provided empirical evidence for a communication challenge that many experienced BCBAs had recognized anecdotally.
Emotional responses to words are conditioned through the history of pairings between those words and other stimuli that have affective valence. Words that share form with terms having strong negative associations — punishment, control, extinction, aversive — elicit conditioned emotional responses based on their colloquial meaning history, even when a technical speaker intends the term in a precise, value-neutral sense. Non-expert listeners cannot readily override the conditioned emotional response with technical knowledge they do not have. The response is not irrational; it reflects how language actually functions as a conditioned stimulus, and understanding this is the first step toward managing it in professional communication.
Terms most consistently associated with negative emotional responses in non-expert audiences include: extinction (colloquially associated with the elimination of species or deliberate destruction), aversive (associated with pain, disgust, or harm), punishment (associated with deliberate infliction of consequences for moral wrongdoing), control (associated with coercion and restriction of autonomy), stimulus (associated with scientific experimentation in ways that can feel dehumanizing), and compliance (associated with submission to authority without question). Terms describing behavioral procedures using clinical-sounding language — such as 'response cost' or 'overcorrection' — can also elicit concern from families who do not know what they mean. BCBAs should monitor their use of these terms in non-expert communication contexts.
BACB Ethics Code 2.04 requires behavior analysts to communicate with clients, families, and other stakeholders in a manner that is understandable to them — not merely technically accurate from the behavior analyst's perspective. This standard creates an obligation to translate technical terminology when communicating with non-expert audiences rather than relying on them to decode behavior analytic jargon. Documenting treatment plans, conducting family meetings, and obtaining informed consent all fall within the scope of this standard. BCBAs who use technical language with non-expert audiences without verifying comprehension through teach-back or follow-up questioning are not fully meeting the communication standard that Code 2.04 establishes.
Effective plain-language explanations of behavior reduction procedures describe what will actually happen, why it will help, and what the family can do to support the procedure — without requiring families to understand behavior analytic terminology. Instead of 'we will use extinction for the attention-maintained behavior,' a BCBA might say, 'we'll practice not responding to the loud calling-out, because we know that giving attention to it — even to say stop — tends to make it happen more often. At the same time, we'll give lots of enthusiastic attention when your child asks for what they need in a quieter way.' This describes the same procedure with the same technical accuracy and communicates it in language that is accessible and clearly motivated by the child's welfare.
Technical terminology is appropriate with family members when it has been explicitly taught and the family has demonstrated comprehension, when precision matters for the family's ability to implement the procedure correctly (and the technical term adds that precision), or when the family has a professional background in a related field that makes behavior analytic terminology accessible. Some families with extensive ABA experience — parents who have received years of behavior analytic services for a child and participated actively in training — develop genuine facility with technical language and appreciate precise communication. The decision should be based on assessment of the specific family's background and comprehension, not on the behavior analyst's communication preference.
The Critchfield et al. findings about normative emotional responses to jargon help explain some of ABA's persistent public perception challenges. When ABA is described using terminology that elicits negative emotional responses in general audiences — in media coverage, social media discussion, or community presentations — those emotional responses shape public opinion of the field even among people who have no direct experience with ABA. BCBAs who communicate publicly about ABA using accessible, outcome-focused language, and who are thoughtful about the emotional valence of the terms they choose, contribute to more accurate and positive public understanding. This is both a professional development issue and a collective field-level communication challenge.
In school-based settings, effective communication involves finding the intersection between behavior analytic concepts and the frameworks that education professionals already use. Terms like antecedent modification can be translated as 'changing how we set up the classroom or activity beforehand to prevent the behavior from happening.' Differential reinforcement of alternative behavior can be described as 'teaching a better way to get what the student needs.' Function-based intervention aligns closely with the education literature on positive behavioral supports. BCBAs who learn the language of special education — IEP goals, least restrictive environment, evidence-based practice in education — and use it alongside behavior analytic concepts build collaborative relationships that translate into higher-fidelity implementation of behavioral recommendations.
Acceptance and Commitment Therapy deliberately uses accessible, metaphor-rich language rather than behavior analytic technical terminology, even though its theoretical foundations are explicitly behavioral. Terms like 'psychological flexibility,' 'fusion with thoughts,' and 'defusion' are more accessible than 'rule-governed behavior patterns' or 'derived stimulus relations,' even though both describe related phenomena. ACT's wide adoption in mainstream clinical psychology has been facilitated in part by this linguistic strategy. ABA practitioners can learn from ACT's example that precision in conceptual content does not require using the same technical labels in all communication contexts — the underlying behavior analytic concepts can be communicated in accessible language without sacrificing the clinical accuracy that effective intervention requires.
Written documentation and verbal communication have different standards and serve different audiences. Clinical documentation — treatment plans, behavior intervention plans, progress notes, and assessment reports — should use technically accurate behavior analytic terminology because these documents serve a clinical record function, support billing and authorization, and may be reviewed by other behavior analysts who need precise information. However, documents intended for family review or signature — informed consent forms, parent-facing progress summaries, family training materials — should use plain language with technical terms defined or translated. Verbal communication with families, school staff, and community partners should default to accessible language, introducing technical terms only when they add value and always with explicit explanation.
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Ready to go deeper? This course covers this topic with structured learning objectives and CEU credit.
Normative Emotional Responses to Behavior Analysis Jargon or How Not to Use Words to Win Friends and Influence People — CEUniverse · 1 BACB General CEUs · $0
Take This Course →1 BACB General CEUs · $0 · CEUniverse
Research-backed educational guide with practice recommendations
Side-by-side comparison with clinical decision framework
All behavior-analytic intervention is individualized. The information on this page is for educational purposes and does not constitute clinical advice. Treatment decisions should be informed by the best available published research, individualized assessment, and obtained with the informed consent of the client or their legal guardian. Behavior analysts are responsible for practicing within the boundaries of their competence and adhering to the BACB Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts.