In response

Abstract

The emergence of positive behav-ior support (PBS) has presented somechallenges and opportunities for ap-plied behavior analysis. In a recentreview and critique of positive behav-ior support, Johnston, Foxx, Jacob-son, Green, and Mulick (2006) ac-knowledge that the success of PBS ingarnering support in schools, agen-cies that service individuals with de-velopmental disabilities, and stateand federal agencies, and suggestsome behaviors to be emulated byapplied behavior analysis in order togarner similar support. However,they recommend that PBS shouldnot be embraced by behavior analystsbecause it poses a threat to the fieldand is less effective than appliedbehavior analysis. Before this recom-mendation is embraced by behavioranalysts, it is important to considerthe ramifications of a split betweenPBS and behavior analysis, particu-larly given that PBS has its origins inbehavior analysis and is conceptual-ized by prominent adherents of thePBS model to be a type of orextension of applied behavior analy-sis (Dunlap, 2006; Horner, 2000). Ipropose that PBS should not bedismissed but should be viewed asan opportunity by the field of appliedbehavior analysis to reach its goal oflarge-scale adoption. A continuedstrong relation between PBS andbehavior analysis may actually ac-complish the broadest disseminationand adoption of effective behavioraltechnology. It will also benefit PBSby keeping it grounded in the con-ceptual system that fostered its de-velopment.PBS is clearly still in its formativestages; in fact the executive board ofthe Association for Positive BehaviorSupport currently is working to de-velop a comprehensive definition ofPBS and to define the roles for theorganization (C. Anderson, personalcommunication, November 2, 2006).As is true in any organization—eventhe Association for Behavior Analy-sis—different members may espousedifferent perspectives on issues suchas the relation between PBS andother perspectives, training models,and so on. This in itself has been thesource of many challenges, and per-haps misunderstandings, for those inthe behavior analysis community.For example, Johnston et al. (2006)emphasize the negative views of PBSresearchers toward behavior analysis.However, many leaders, trainers, andresearchers in PBS have a favorableview of behavior analysis, considerthemselves to be behavior analysts,and continue to publish in behavioraljournals such as the Journal ofApplied Behavior Analysis and TheBehavior Analyst. Thus, although thissituation has been viewed pessimisti-cally by Johnston et al., I believe thatthere are significant grounds forhaving an optimistic view about thefuture relation between PBS andapplied behavior analysis. BecausePBS is in its formative stages and isrooted in behavior analysis, the field