Thread by @VVerkopft

.@AnnMemmott, would you be interested in submitting an article about the criticism of ABA to the journal "Der Skeptiker", as far as I can tell the German equivalent to the "Sceptical Inquirer"?
1/13

https://twitter.com/nikilmukerji/status/1602028689608540161

The journal managed to publish in it's recent volume three articles about the critics of ABA without ever addressing any of the main concerns against ABA.
2/13
gwup.org/147-wurzel/arc…

Now the chair of scientific council of the organisation (@gwup), @nikilmukerji thinks that a well researched article countering those three articles would be published, and I'd like to take him at his word.
3/13

I believe you are better suited to write such an article than anyone else. But maybe we should tag some other researchers?
4/13

.@milton_damian, would you write an article about the ethical concerns against ABA, and in doing so refute the claim of K. Dillenburger that all the people who criticise ABA don't know science?
5/13

Or @KristenBott, would you write an article in reply to an article of S. Vyse who cited your article about conflict of interest (misleadingly) in the context of people being afraid of "Big Pharma" oder "Big Government"?
6/13

Feel free to tag anybody who might be able and willing to submit such an article! I'd like to prove that there are more than enough people critical of ABA in academia.

I want to add some context, though.
7/13

The organisation issuing the "Skeptiker" is respected for it's engagement against pseudo-science like homeopathy or antivaxxers. But one member of their schientific council is a behaviorist, and ...8/13

...prominent members als well as the official account , @gwup, are liking or promoting tweets and articles that are pro-ABA.

Members of the autistic community have been criticising that for years.
9/13

I would understand every person who thinks it's no use to try and submit an article. The board of the journal seems to have actively ignored the concerns of the autistic community specifically directed at them, including lists of scientific articles. 10/13

And instead of letting someone neutral judge the criticism, they invited two ABA-proponents and one person who at least has written favorable of ABA in the past.
11/13

But I would be glad if someone at least tried to get one article published. I think there's much to gain:
12/13

Either you would reach a lot of people with a substantiated refutation of the claims of ABA.
Or it could demonstrate the level of bias if they reject a good article with spurious arguments.
13/13

#GWUPGate