INTERPROFESSIONAL COLLABORATIVE
PRACTICE BETWEEN BEHAVIOR ANALYSTS
AND SPEECH LANGUAGE PATHOLOGISTS

AAlthough considered a youngize professional behavior analysts’ responapplied science, behavior analysis sibility for interprofessional collaboration
has matured over the past six dewhile engaged in the treatment of a vacades. Its premise that behavior is a prodriety of conditions (e.g., autism), where
uct of its environment and circumstances
there is considerable overlap between
holds that only behavior in relation to its
speech-language pathologists’ and behavantecedents and consequences is worthy
ior analysts’ scopes of practice.
of analysis and susceptible to modification. Extrapolated from a natural science
Despite many differences, it may be surendeavor, a set of conceptually systematic prising to some that the professional
learning principles made it possible forlandscape of behavior analysis has many
behavior analysts to develop numerous
points of convergence with speech-lantactics and procedures that are supportguage pathology. For example, many
ed by a robust empiricalearly speech-language
literature and dissemipathologists were trained
nated through rigorous
in behavior analysis and
The purpose of thisuniversity and experiential
much of their treatment
resource document
training, bringing about aprocedures were derived
is to characterize
new profession capable offrom the science of behavtreating a variety of human
ior and learning. As theprofessionalconditions.
profession progressed,
behavior analysts’
however, speech-language
responsibility for
As the profession of bepathology was influenced
interprofessional
havior analysis continues
by an eclectic set of theto evolve, there is noories and not a single
collaboration while
doubt that behavior anatheoretical orientation as
engaged in thelysts and their allied healthis the case with behavior
treatment of acolleagues will experience
analysis. Regardless of thevariety of conditions. philosophical origins ofgrowing pains. Tensions
naturally emerge whenspeech-language patholprofessionals advocate
ogy treatments, the princifor their right to practice and compete forples of behavior that are responsible for a
finite resources. The burgeoning populatreatment’s effectiveness are recognizable.
tion of professional behavior analysts may
encounter resistance, discord, or confusion Behavior analysts’ practice is informed byabout how they fit within a human sera set of universal principles that govern
vice arena alongside other health profeslearning and behavior change. Howevsionals. While the potential for conflicter, knowledge of universally applicable
exists between professional fields suchprinciples does not translate to an unconas psychology and occupational therapy,
strained scope of practice or an unlimited
increasing tensions between speech-lanscope of competence. Evidence of thisguage pathologists and behavior analysts critical misunderstanding is when behavior
signal the need to provide a set of guideanalysts suggest that a speech-language
lines to enhance behavior analysts’ ability
pathologist is not needed in the treatment
to engage in interprofessional collaboraof communication disabilities or whentive practice and properly navigate their
behavior analysts treat a clinical problem
scopes of competence. Thus, the purpose(e.g., swallowing) of which they have littleof this resource document is to characterto no understanding. Although the science

of behavior is germane to all behaviors,
behavior analysts should not interpret it
to mean that other professionals are notneeded. Nor should the elimination orreplacement of other professions be thegoal of professional
behavior analysis.
Knowledgeof universally
The regulation ofapplicable principles professional behavior analysts throughdoes not translate licensure legitimizes
to an unconstrained the practice and sets
forth the profession’s
scope of practice or scope of practice.
an unlimited scope However, a scope ofpractice is only theset of activities thatof competence.

a licensed/certified
behavior analyst is authorized to engage
in. That authorization is conditioned upon
the professional also being competent. A
scope of competence refers to the extent to which a professional can engage
in specific clinical activities at a level ofperformance consistent with a specified
standard of excellence. The difference
between scope of practice and scope ofcompetence is critically important because an individual behavior analyst is
only free to practice in the space where
their scope of practice and scope of competence overlap. Just because one isauthorized to practice relative to a specificprocedure, population, and setting does
not mean they are competent to do so.
The reverse is also true. Just because one
is competent to practice relative to a specific procedure, population, and setting
does not mean they are authorized to doso. It is up to the individual professional
to seek training, consultation, and supervision when practicing outside of one’s
scope of competence, and it is incumbent
upon the professional behavior analyst to
never practice outside of their scope ofpractice.
Even when behavior analysts are careful topractice within their overlapping scopes,
they will find some speech-language
pathologists practicing in the same space,especially when it comes to children withautism and other developmental disabil-ities in home, clinic, or school settings.
Within this shared space, the potential forperceived and actual encroachment exists—and where skillful collaboration andprofessional humility are essential.
Scope ofPractice

SLP’s
Scope of Practice& Scope ofCompetence

Scope of Practiceand Competence

SLP’s & BA’s
Overlap

Scope ofCompetence

Behavior Analyst’s
Scope of Practice &Scope ofCompetence

Understanding the Overlap

There are many areas of overlap between
speech-language pathologists’ and behavior analysts’ scopes of practice. However, it is not as simple as comparing two
scopes of practice (as the figure suggests).
While American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) provides a single
scope of practice that regulates the profession of speech-language pathology,
professional behavior analysts may besubject to scopes of practice set forth
by national organizations (e.g., Behavior
Analysis Certification Board), state licensures, other disciplines (e.g., psychology,education), or other countries. Given there
are several possible misunderstandings
surrounding behavior analysts’ scope ofpractice when compared to speech-language pathologists’, behavior analysts

Within this shared space, thepotential for perceived andactual encroachment exists––andwhere skillful collaboration andprofessional humility are essential.

should not assume their colleagues know
which scope of practice regulates theirwork. Furthermore, it is the responsibilityof individual behavior analysts to be transparent about their scope of competence.
Regardless of overlapping scopes ofpractice and scopes of competence withspeech-language pathologists, behavior
analysts should be prepared to collaborate regularly and consult when necessary.
Promotion of communication skills of children with disabilities is one area in which
both behavior analysts and speech-language pathologists commonly practice.
As they overlap in the teaching of communication skills, each profession contributes
unique expertise and repertoires. Behavior analysts have strengths in measuringcommunication skills, especially related
to functionally-defined verbal operants,
whereas speech-language pathologists
have a deep understanding of speech andlanguage development. Operating from abehavioral perspective does not discounta developmental approach. For example, understanding the developmentalsequence of sound acquisition is criticalwhen developing behavioral programs
to increase sound and word repertoires.
Since this developmental understanding
is not standardly included in behavior
analysts’ training, consultation and collaboration with speech-language pathologists are critical. Other clinical conditions
around which behavior analysts shouldseek the expertise of their speech-language pathology colleagues include, but
are not limited to, fluency disorders, voice
and resonance, swallowing, and feeding.
Behavior analysts teach communication
based on their functions, defined by environment-behavior causal relations. While
speech-language pathologists have indepth knowledge of language structures(e.g., syntax, morphology, phonology,etc.), they also assess and teach communicative functions, albeit following different definitions than behavior analysts.
Speech-language pathologists categorize
communicative functions by the communicator’s perceived intentions (e.g., behavior
regulation, joint attention, social interaction). Different ways of talking about

Operating from abehavioral perspective
does not discount adevelopmental approach and consultation
with colleagues whose
education and training
includes a thoroughunderstanding of childdevelopment should bestandard practice.
communicative functions is not a reason to
avoid collaborating. Instead, recognition
that behavior analysts and speech-language pathologists use different terms for
similar concepts can serve as a foundation
for increased understanding and respectful dialogue, which ideally build toward
complementary and collaborative services. The ultimate goal of every treatment
plan is to achieve the greatest outcomes
for the client. Ensuring they benefit fromall possible expertise and skills increases
the likelihood of attaining that goal.
Behavior analysts should be actively
engaged in learning at all times. Professionals from both disciplines can learn
from each other and should do so for thebenefit of their shared clients. Although
not an exhaustive list, the table outlines a
few relative strengths of each profession
and areas around which there may be
opportunities for collaboration and professional development. Importantly, theselists are not designed to describe every
individual, but to reflect content that isroutinely taught to students. Some behavior analysts will have strengths in areas on
the list for speech-language pathologists
while some speech-language pathologists
will have strengths in areas on the list for
behavior analysts.

Relative Strengths and Opportunities for Collaboration
RELATIVE STRENGTHSSPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGISTS

Diagnostics
Spoken and Written LanguageChild Development
Articulation/Phonology
Swallowing and Feeding
Language Structures
Augmentative and Alternative Communication
Speech, Fluency, and Voice

BEHAVIOR ANALYSTS

Data Collection Strategies
Behavior Interventions
Functional Behavior Assessments
Reinforcement and Motivation
Single Case Design Methodology
Functional Communication Training
Preference Assessments
Principles and Tactics of Effective TeachingOPPORTUNITIES FOR COLLABORATIONSPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGISTS

Behavior Management
Functional Communication Training
Single Case Design Methodology
Data Collection Strategies
Preference Assessments
Principles and Tactics of Effective Teaching

BEHAVIOR ANALYSTS

Developmental Norms
Articulation/Phonology
Structures of Language
Feeding
Language Sampling
Augmentative and Alternative Communication

Interprofessional Collaboration Competencies
In spirit of enhancing client outcomes
and the capacity of professional behavior
analysts to engage effectively within interdisciplinary teams, the ABAI practiceboard recommends that practitioners andthe organizations that train them adoptthe World Health Organization’s (WHO)
Framework for Action on Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice(IPEC) and actively seek to engage ininterprofessional practice (IPP) and interprofessional education (IPE). The WHO
outlines four interprofessional competencies that emerge from a set of principles
and are not unlike those readily adopted
by behavior analysis licensing bodies (e.g.,client and family centered, communityand process oriented, relationship-based,
developmentally appropriate recommendations, sensitivity to practice differences,and outcome driven).

In INTERPROFESSIONAL PRACTICE(IPP), multiple health workers fromdifferent professional backgrounds
work together with patients, families
and caregivers and communities todeliver the highest quality of care.
INTERPROFESSIONAL EDUCATION(IPE) is when students from twoor more professions learn about,from and with each other to enableeffective collaboration and improvehealth outcomes.

WHO, 2010, p. 2

COMPETENCY 1: VALUES AND ETHICS– Work Together with Mutual Respect
and Shared Values. Behavior analysts arecharged with working respectfully withclients and families who differ by race,ethnicity, and culture. The obligation toembrace diversity extends to other professionals on a client’s assessment and/ortreatment team. It is incumbent upon professional behavior analysts to engage withother professionals respectfully and withintegrity, while validating alternate opinions
and striving to build common ground andshared goals. This requires a great deal ofcultural humility, which is the ability to beother-oriented when engaging interpersonally with people from different cultures. In
general, behavior analysts and speech-language pathologists have strong culturalidentities. The practice of cultural humility
and cultural reciprocity (i.e., self-reflectionand learning about individuals while avoiding assumptions) will strengthen interprofessional collaboration among professionals
who come from different cultures.
COMPETENCY 2: ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES – Acknowledge Team Members’
Roles and Abilities. Behavior analysts
clearly communicate to other professionals
what their role and responsibilities are, what
they can do for the client, and what expertise they can contribute to the team. At thesame time, behavior analysts must be candid
about the limitations of their skills and competence and strive to understand the rolesand responsibilities of other team members.
Behavior analysts should describe how
their own practice can be augmented by
the expertise of other professionals on theteam (e.g., speech language pathologist),
which necessitates self-reflection and cultural humility as well as understanding theircolleague’s areas of competence. Behavior
analysts should avoid making assumptions
about another team member’s approach,role, and responsibilities, as there is great
variability in the philosophies, opinions andexpertise of speech-language pathologists.
COMPETENCY 3: INTERPROFESSIONAL
COMMUNICATION – Communicate in a
Manner That Supports a Team Approach.
Behavior analysts use professional oral andwritten communication practices whenengaging with an interdisciplinary teamand individual colleagues. Communication
should be positive, proactive, and oriented toward establishing agreements andresolving disagreements. Personally attacking others, criticizing another discipline’sresearch, or dismissing a colleague’s professional opinion reflect poorly on behavior
analysts and the entire profession of behavior analysis. Active, empathic listening willencourage team members to share openly
and reciprocate respect for behavior analysts’ contributions to the team. Genuine
on-going conversations are needed to establish shared values and strengthen mutualrespect.
COMPETENCY 4: TEAMS AND TEAMWORK– Apply Team-building Values and Principles. The evidence-based practice ofApplied Behavior Analysis demands theintegration of the best available evidencewith clinical expertise and client values andpreferences. This framework, adopted bymost human service disciplines, organizes
team decision making and shared accountability. When evidence-based practice has
been intentionally and explicitly establishedas the team’s process, the team does notneed to rely on any one member’s clinicalopinion. Instead, rigorous scientific researchand client and family preferences are given
proper attention and consideration alongside clinicians’ expertise and judgment. To
the extent that evidence-based practice is ateam-based, decision-making process, theteam (not an individual) is responsible forclient outcomes and share the responsibility of problem solving for the good of theclient. However, individual team members,
including behavior analysts, are responsible
for contributing to the improvement of theteam’s process and overall performance.
Behavior analysts have an ethical responsibility to help carry out the team’s planeven when the team’s decision does notalign with their own. They are urged to go
beyond just cooperating with speech-language pathologists and other colleagues,
which implies each professional works on
individual goals. Real collaboration involves
working together to accomplish joint goals
and integrated care.

Benefits of Interprofessional
Collaborative PracticeThere are clear benefits of interprofessional collaborative practice to clients. It
prevents unnecessary replication or conflicting treatments, reduces the cost ofcare, and promotes high quality comprehensive service delivery. For practitioners,
interprofessional practice creates enriching professional and personal relationships and fosters professional growth anddevelopment. Interprofessional collaboration fosters a culture of teamwork among
the contributing professionals whichheightens treatment adherence and fidelity, increases generalization opportunities,
and sustains effective team performance.
Finally, when behavior analysts engage
in interprofessional collaboration, thefield of behavior analysis and a world ofpotential clients benefit. Genuine demonstrations of cultural humility increase theinfluence of the science of behavior because non-behavior analysts may be more
willing to learn about it. The public imageof behavior analysis can be one of interprofessional respect and collaborative

The public image ofbehavior analysis
can be one ofinterprofessional
respect andcollaborative
effectiveness, which
will ultimately prime
the practice ofbehavior analysis
to benefit society
in meaningful andscalable ways.
effectiveness, which will ultimately prime
the practice of behavior analysis to benefit society in meaningful and scalable
ways. In essence, behavior analysts canmore productively act to save the world.

REFERENCES AND RESOURCES FOR FURTHER STUDYBrodhead, M. T., Quigley, S. P., & Wilczynski, S. M. (2018). A call for discussion about scope of competence in behavior analysis. Behavior analysis in practice, 11(4), 424-435.
Carr, J. E., & Nosik, M. R. (2017). Professional credentialing of practicing behavior analysts. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4(1), 3-8.
Collaborative Practice: Report of an Expert Panel. Washington, DC. https://ipecollaborative.org/uploads/IPEC-Core-Competencies.pdf
Esch, B. E., & Forbes, H. J. (2017). An annotated bibliography of articles in the Journal of Speech andLanguage Pathology-Applied Behavior Analysis. Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 33, 139–157.
Interprofessional Education Collaborative. (2016). Core competencies for interprofessional collaborative
practice: 2016 update. Washington, DC: Interprofessional Education Collaborative.
LaFrance, D. L., Weiss, M. J., Kazemi, E., Gerenser, J., & Dobres, J. (2019). Multidisciplinary teaming:
Enhancing collaboration through increased understanding. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 12(3), 709-726.
Slocum, T. A., Detrich, R., Wilczynski, S. M., Spencer, T. D., Lewis, T., & Wolfe, K. (2014). The evidence-based practice of applied behavior analysis. The Behavior Analyst, 37(1), 41-56.
World Health Organization. (2010). Framework for action on interprofessional education and collaborative practice. http://www.who.int/hrh/resources/framework_action/en
Wright, P. I. (2019). Cultural Humility in the Practice of Applied Behavior Analysis. Behavior Analysis inPractice, 12(4), 805-809.