Stop Treating Complex Problems Like Simple Ones: Why a Zoomed-Out View Matters in ABA

A mistake that quietly haunts behavior analysts?

Thinking too small.

Getting locked into one variable.

Believing that because we’ve identified a single issue, we’ve found the issue.

It’s easy to do. Our training teaches us to analyze antecedents, pinpoint functions, and apply evidence-based interventions. But the real world—the messy, unpredictable, curveball-throwing world—doesn’t always fit neatly into our structured frameworks.

Take the medical field. A guy walks into a doctor’s office. Chronic fatigue, headaches, feeling like he’s been run over by a bus. The doctor runs some tests, finds a vitamin D deficiency, and prescribes a Vitamin D supplement.

Case closed. Right?

Wrong. Two weeks later, nothing’s changed. The guy is still exhausted, still miserable. This time, the doctor asks more questions. Turns out, the patient is unemployed, barely leaves the house, binge-watches Netflix in a dark room all day, and has a history of childhood trauma. The vitamin D deficiency wasn’t the problem. It was a symptom. The real issue? Social isolation, lack of movement, and a life that had shrunk down to the size of a bedroom.

Come on, doc! Get it right!

We can offer our criticisms on the physician for not seeing the big picture. But, BCBAs make the same mistake all the time. A child has problem behavior when we take away the iPad. We see it, we analyze it, we conclude: "Ah, a mand issue! Teach functional communication." And sometimes, that’s true. But what if it’s not just a mand issue? What if this kid has a history of reinforcer rigidity, where their world has been reduced to a handful of preferred items? What if their play skills never developed, so when the iPad disappears, there’s nothing else reinforcing in their environment? What if there’s a sensory component, or a sleep issue, or a broader lack of engagement in social interactions? Just like our vitamin D guy, this problem has layers.

The univariate approach—the "this one variable is the culprit" mindset—leads to missed opportunities. It’s not that identifying a variable is wrong—in fact it’s the right thing to do if it is the variable. It’s that stopping there can be dangerous—especially if things aren’t working. We see this all the time in ABA settings. A BCBA might hyper-focus on antecedent interventions while ignoring larger setting events like family dynamics, reinforcement histories, competing contingencies, or even physiological factors that could be influencing behavior. It’s like trying to fix a sinking boat by plugging a single hole when water is rushing in from five different places.

So what’s the alternative? A multivariate approach. Zoom out. Look at the whole learner—not just the immediate behavior.

Take that child struggling with transitions. Sure, we could implement visual schedules and first-then statements and call it a day. But what if the real issue is that their schedule is already overloaded? What if they’re not getting enough movement throughout the day? What if their language processing delays make transitions verbally overwhelming? Solving the wrong problem, no matter how well-intended, won’t move the needle.

Here’s a quick exercise: The next time a problem behavior isn’t budging—or a skill isn’t sticking—don’t look for the answer. Find several potential answers. List out multiple hypotheses. Instead of "The child tantrums when the iPad is removed, so let’s teach a mand," ask:

What’s their reinforcement history?
Do they have a variety of interests?
How does their home environment support (or limit) flexibility?
Are there underlying physiological issues—sleep, hunger, sensory needs?
What’s their history with transitions?

The best BCBAs are the ones who stay flexible, question their assumptions, and attack problems from multiple angles. They know that problem behavior isn’t just behavior. It’s a window into everything else happening in a learner’s life.

Now, you might say: Martin, you fool, there is a principle in our field that insists we take a parsimonious approach. Meaning, we must start with the simplest, most probable hypothesis—not the complex one.

Sure.

But here’s a few game changing questions:

Is it more likely that most behavior is controlled by a single variable? Or multiple ones? If a child hasn’t eaten, hasn’t slept, has a history of egregious trauma, and doesn’t want to do their homework, is it really parsimonious to conclude that this little guy or gal is simply seeking escape and just needs to mand for a break?

Truth of the matter is this: In some situations it’s more parsimonious to conclude that behavior is complex and multi-variate.

So, have the courage to zoom out. Think bigger. Think broader.

---

Martin Myers is a BCBA with a passion for helping improve the field of ABA. He is the creator of BxMastery, with over 4,000 goal ideas, sequenced, to inspire your programming. With 10+ years of experience in the field, he’s dedicated to empowering others and fostering positive change through effective leadership and communication. Connect with Martin on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok for more insights and updates.