REPORT: Report from FABBS Meeting

I attended the annual Council of Delegates meeting of the Federation of Associations in Behavioral and Brain Sciences (FABBS) as the representative of the AAPB on December 9, 2024, in Washington, D.C. FABBS is the eyes and ears of the behavioral science community in Washington, particularly for issues related to research funding and regulation. Below is my report to AAPB on issues discussed at the meeting that are relevant to AAPB members, particularly those involved in research in applied psychophysiology.

First a couple of broad observations.

As the proverbial “elephant in the living room,” the possibilities of large funding cuts, government reorganization, and changes in funding priorities loomed over the meeting but mostly were not discussed primarily because of lack of information. Actually, the tone of the meeting was optimistic, with presentations from various researchers and government officials who have experienced previous upheavals. FABBS leadership noted that in the past although proposed federal budgets often included cuts in funding for behavioral research, amounts approved had increased. Generally, there appears to be widespread bipartisan support for good science, particularly for health promotion.

Also, there is a confusingly large array of committees devoted to promoting behavioral science in the federal government. We heard from leading members of these committees from a variety of federal agencies, including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), several of its component institutes, the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Justice, the Food and Drug Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the office of the President. The various agencies employ hundreds of behavioral scientists, in both permanent and temporary positions.

Although much of the behavioral science funding is earmarked for grants to investigators throughout the country, a large amount of internal research also takes place, with exciting career possibilities for behavioral scientists. Young professionals are encouraged to investigate these positions, as are academics who would like to contribute to federal programs during sabbaticals. It is not known how these opportunities will be affected by the incoming administration, however.

One of the most dramatic presentations was by Dr. Jane Simoni, Director of the Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research of the NIH, who presented data on the state of health and healthcare in our country. Compared with 10 of the other wealthiest nations in the world, the cost of healthcare in the United States is by far the highest, and the results are by far the poorest. Important indicators of the latter included maternal and infant mortality, life expectancy and longevity, and deaths by violence (a large outlying effect). The largest contributors to mortality in the United States are heart disease, cancer, injury, and the effects of COVID infections. Social and behavioral issues loom large in contributing to these problems. Indices of health are poorer among people with lower incomes and among non-Whites, who also have less access to medical care. Issues such as substance abuse, stress, and obesity play important roles, all of interest to many AAPB members and areas where our methods may play a large role in improving public health. Funding for behavioral research has expanded in the past few years.

Consistent with these findings, the Biden administration has emphasized federal support for research on remediating health disparities and improving public health. Although there is support for basic research, there is a strong emphasis on research directly related to health outcomes. Applications of artificial intelligence are also of great interest as is quantification of brain involvement in disease, behavioral disease ontology, social and behavioral impact of COVID, firearm injury and mortality, and interdisciplinary team building.

Although there is little information about the priorities of the incoming administration, it is possible that prevention and alternative medicine might be emphasized, and these may present an opportunity for research in applied psychophysiology. Researchers are advised to keep current on federal priorities.

On the other hand, the emphasis on cost-cutting may yield fewer research opportunities for anyone. Time will tell. FABBS will be an important source of information about trends, because the leadership meets frequently with various members of the Legislative and Executive branches. Scientists are also advised to stay connected with legislators and members of the Executive branch, particularly those involved in behavioral science committees, and to advocate for measures we deem important for public health. FABBS can help facilitate such contacts.

In breakout groups, we discussed the issue of translating behavioral research to public policy. Communication outside of usual scholarly journals was emphasized, including use of broadcast and social media. FABBS staff have pledged to help facilitate these measures. Federal support for our research and findings is highly dependent on public opinion and public pressure. It therefore is important for all of us to look for opportunities to communicate our findings to the public. This may not come easily to behavioral scientists; the skills and conventions of scientific writing often need translation to the more journalistic style that can impact public opinion and generate pressure for policy adoption. Some scientific societies provide such translation services.

Issues of research integrity also were discussed, as was the fluid nature of some scientific conclusions as investigators examine the complex nature of health and human behavior and generate new information. When findings are flawed, the public loses faith in science, but conclusions from even the most carefully done research are often challenged as additional knowledge is acquired. How do we balance the need to refine and question our own findings while asking the public to respect the scientific method and adopt public policy based on best available knowledge rather than baseless conjecture? Methodological and ethical standards must be at the highest levels, and results must be communicated to the public clearly and succinctly.

FABBS also presented awards to individuals whose research has had the greatest public impact or has the potential for such an impact. These awards included a lifetime achievement award, a midcareer award, and early career and student awards. Societies are asked to recommend members who are worthy of such awards.

Finally, we were reminded that FABBS helps all manners of communication between behavioral science societies and federal agencies. FABBS can help secure speakers for our annual meetings and make needed connections to various federal officials, including officials in the Executive branch (such as NIH and NSF) or members of Congress. We are urged to make use of these services.