Why Evidence Alone Doesn’t Change Systems
Writing Beyond Academia in Behavior Analysis
The science of behavior offers powerful, evidence-based solutions to real-world problems. Yet this evidence often stalls at the point of publication, failing to influence the organizations, schools, and systems it was designed to improve. The issue is rarely the science itself. It is how the science is communicated (Axelrod, 1992; Detrich, 2018).
Learning to write for non-academic audiences is not a “nice extra.” It is a core dissemination skill.
Dissemination Is NOT Just Publications
Within behavior analysis, dissemination is often equated with publishing in peer-reviewed journals or presenting at conferences. From a functional perspective, however, dissemination has only occurred when a practice is actually adopted (Baer, Wolf, & Risley, 1968; Detrich, 2018).
The audiences we most need to influence - corporate leaders, parents, policymakers, human resource professionals, and business stakeholders - are not reading APBA, JABA, JEAB, JOBM, or Perspectives on Behavior Science. Academic writing primarily reaches other behavior analysts, meaning our most common dissemination strategies are aimed inward (Axelrod, 1992; Critchfield, 2014).
As Detrich (2018) points out, this often results in a “train and hope” approach: we publish our findings and hope the right people somehow find, understand, and use them. Hope, however, is not a dissemination strategy. Non-academic writing is an active approach to dissemination, yet it is rarely emphasized or taught within our formal training models (Detrich, 2018; Todd, 2014).
Behavior Analytic Jargon Doesn’t Help
Research has directly examined how the language used by behavior analysts affects understanding and uptake of behavioral interventions. Studies comparing behavior-analytic journals have found that more technical writing tends to be less concrete, less imageable, and less meaningful. All features associated with reduced comprehension and usability (Diller, Salters-Pedneault, & Gallagher, 2014).
From a behavioral perspective, this pattern is predictable. Dense writing increases response effort. Increased effort decreases engagement. Decreased engagement reduces the likelihood that a practice will be adopted (Baer et al., 1968; Diller et al., 2014).
Non-academic writing reduces this effort. It relies on clearer language, real-world examples, and familiar framing so readers can more easily contact the relevance of behavioral principles. This is not about “dumbing things down.” It is about making the science usable (Critchfield, 2014; Todd, 2014).
Making Science Usable
Non-academic writing is not a replacement for peer-reviewed publication, nor should it be viewed as secondary or optional. It is a complementary dissemination strategy that addresses a gap academic journals cannot fill. Academic writing builds the science. Non-academic writing ensures the science functions in the world (Axelrod, 1992; Detrich, 2018).
For behavior analysts working in areas such as organizational behavior management, project management, safety, technology, marketing, or healthcare, non-academic writing may take many forms, including:
Blog posts translating behavioral concepts for leaders and practitioners
Magazine articles connecting behavior science to real organizational problems
Case studies in trade journals that highlight outcomes and application rather than methodology alone
A recurring theme across the dissemination literature is that behavior analysis struggles not because it lacks effective technology, but because it has not communicated that technology effectively (Axelrod, 1992; Foxx, 1996; Detrich, 2018). Addressing this gap requires expanding our professional repertoires, not abandoning rigor, but learning to tell better stories and write in ways that allow evidence to travel (Hineline, 2018; Camacho & Ruiz, 2018).
Many behavior analysts were trained almost exclusively in academic writing, and stepping outside that model can feel uncomfortable or even risky. That discomfort is understandable. However, it does not eliminate the need for broader dissemination. If behavior analysis is to influence systems at scale, accessibility must be treated as a professional responsibility rather than an optional skill.
Dissemination as Supervised Practice and Professional Responsibility
If dissemination is a core professional skill, then it must be intentionally taught and practiced - including during supervised fieldwork. Supervised experience in behavior analysis is intended to do more than prepare trainees to pass an exam or work exclusively within clinical settings. Its purpose is to develop competent professionals who can apply behavioral principles effectively, ethically, and flexibly across diverse practice areas (Luke, Carr, & WIlder, 2018).
As Luke, Carr, and Wilder (2018) note, the BACB defines supervised fieldwork broadly to account for variation across roles and settings. What matters is not the form an activity takes, but whether it meaningfully builds behavior-analytic, professional, and ethical repertoires while benefiting clients.
Within this framework, non-academic writing can function as a legitimate supervised practice when it is intentionally designed, closely supervised, and evaluated for impact. Trainees may engage in activities such as researching behavior-analytic topics, identifying socially significant problems, analyzing trends in the field, networking with professionals, conducting interviews, and translating empirical findings into accessible language for specific audiences. In this context, non-academic writing is an application of behavior analysis to the problems of influence, adoption, and systems-level change (Detrich, 2018; Hineline, 2018).
Dissemination is also a teaching behavior. Outside academia, behavior analysts routinely teach parents, staff, administrators, interdisciplinary teams, and organizational leaders. Clear writing allows us to teach at scale. When trainees learn to explain behavioral concepts without jargon, shape understanding rather than correct misconceptions, and present evidence in ways decision-makers can use, they are developing skills directly transferable to supervision, consultation, staff training, and leadership (Critchfield, 2014; Todd, 2014).
Framing dissemination as a professional responsibility aligns with both the science and the ethics of behavior analysis. If our work is not understood, accessed, or adopted by those who could benefit from it, the responsibility does not rest solely with the audience. It rests with us to expand our repertoires, communicate more effectively, and teach in ways that support meaningful change (Baer et al., 1968; Detrich, 2018).
Supervised experience should therefore include intentional opportunities for trainees to practice dissemination. Not as a substitute for technical training, but as a complement to it. Developing the ability to write, teach, and influence responsibly ensures that future behavior analysts are not only technically competent, but capable of extending the reach of the science beyond academic boundaries and into the systems where change actually occurs.
References
Axelrod, S. (1992). Disseminating an effective educational technology. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(1), 31–35. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1992.25-31
Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., & Risley, T. R. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1(1), 91–97. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1968.1-91
Camacho, I., & Ruiz, D. (2018). The promotion of behavioral science through narrative: Sharing and making it your own. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 41, 569–574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-018-0157-6
Critchfield, T. S. (2014). Ten rules for discussing behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 7, 141–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-014-0026-z
Detrich, R. (2018). Rethinking dissemination: Storytelling as a part of the repertoire. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 41, 541–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-018-0160-y
Diller, J. W., Salters-Pedneault, K., & Gallagher, A. R. (2014). Effective dissemination requires effective talk: A comparison of behavior-analytic journals. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 7, 103–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-014-0020-5
Hineline, P. N. (2018). Narrative: Why it’s important, and how it works. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 41, 471–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-018-0137-x
Luke, M. M., Carr, J. E., & Wilder, D. A. (2018). On the compatibility of organizational behavior management and BACB certification. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 38(4), 288–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/01608061.2018.1514347
Todd, J. T. (2014). Some useful resources for students who are tempted to bring enlightenment to errant non-behaviorists. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 7, 143–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-014-0027-y