As an advocate for ABA (please keep the safety on, those of you brandishing guns), I have to say these videos reflect the limited knowledge we had about learning and teaching at the time. These tapes are not a true reflection of what ABA looks like today and to suggest that is just scare mongering.
Oh for gracious sakes! That "therapist" reminds me of Gordon Ramsey of "Hell's Kitchen"! The way they just yell at the kids like that, I see it as no different than the way Ramsey yells at the contestants on his show.
No matter how you turn it, define it, place it Deceptively under the very convincing and seductive guise of "scientifically proven" (which, when we properly deconstruct application and terminology translates into scientifically proven modified target SURFACE BEHAVIORS, and has nada to do with recent decades in neurosciences (specifically neuroplasticity), where neuronal connections between the limbic system (e.g., amgydala, all or nothing catastrophic actions) and prefrontal cortex
or prais (I see it, I want it, how do I get it), is by first clinically and empathically recognizing sensory-based challenges (hyporeactivity, hyperactivity or mixed-reactivities in various visual spatial, proprioceptive, vestibular, auditory and tactile domains) beneath external behavioral differences) and by primary caregivers following the child's lead and clinically, developmentally and empathically attributing affect (emotional) meaning to the child's non-injurious perseverative behaviors
Joint attention/shared attention is then established in a meaningful way. In a manner where spontaneous integration, as we (unlike this video and much ABA to present), are deepening affect regulated circles of communication (preverbal foundation of deepening attachment and expanding emotional signaling) that supports the child's emerging autonomy. What we are seeing here i(in these videos) are not only the antithesis of complex and comprehensive neurodevelopmental understanding and
approach, but I dare say, to the apparent outrage of many who would defend otherwise, borders on or is child abuse; however, well intentioned it is the quintessential opposite of an empathic and clinically well informed (functional emotional developmental milestones, individuate sensory processing differences and caregiver and clinician relationship based patterns, which would begin to constitute a comprehensive DEVELOPMENTAL based approach, as opposed to "scientifically targeting
All of it is NAZI, no matter how you dress it up, it is behavour correctional facilities for disabled children who are NOT ABLE to respond INSTANTLY and to teach them INSTANT GRATIFICATION is to reinforce tantrums - this is all wrong ANYONE DOING ASA is sick and brainwashed !!!
as an ABA teacher with austic children i can say we DO NOT use this first womans form of teaching. as for what we actually teach we teach them how to learn to me it seems as thought many of you need an education as to what we as behaviorists do and how autsim works please before you comment do a little research ABA is the leading thearpy for a reason
@jennataylor2 if Lovaas' claims that after ABA 47% of children with autism end up 'indistinguishable' from their peers, why is there still such high demand for school age and adult services? hmm...
by the way, children are NOT 'autistic'. They are people with autism, there is a difference and maybe YOU should be the one getting an education.
The first clip was just a disaster. How did that woman get her job?
The other clips were useless. Kids are not animals. Constantly telling them "do this" and having them imitate behaviors like tapping their shoulders isn't teaching them anything that has any purpose. Plus, good grief, most of those so-called therapists used such harsh voices for no reason and totally terrified the children!
@MsSourGrapes my son and I have been hounded and tortured for trying to expose Lovaas and cruelty- Lovaas is nothing but a eugenics promoting nazi and sadistic hater of children- these children are being exploited in MANY WAYS
scary videos!! what did these ppl think they were actually achieving????? this is emotional abuse and mental cruelty. my son has autism & i can't watch this in full. too distressing. the autistic way of being is no less valid than the NT perspective. start with acceptance instead of trying to squeeze square pegs in to round holes!! esp if the square pegs in question are happy being square :) whats normal anyway??? certainly not the so called teachers in this video...sadists for sure. scary.
so many educators need help understanding how to work with these children, and how to identify sensory integration impairments (there are many different types, different levels of severity)...good to see progress being made in this area. now let's see where they go with the interweaving of symptoms between autism spectrum and ADHD, etc. lots of overlap!
This young woman is violating the child aggressively. If Í was watching Id have a hard time not slapping her.
Imagine how well he could do if he didnt have to expend energy avoiding eyecontact. Or if he was allowed to use his energy doing the tasks, instead of relation to the woman grapping his hands all the time.
we are studying this video in my language development class and its a good use of modeling but with kids with this kind of severity requires a certain finess and caring that this person isnt using
Has any of you ever worked with autistic children, with different degress of severity, and seen the improvement and big differences it can produce to real lives?
The children just learn to imitate, but not the understanding in their behavior.
Some autistic friends of mine (I'm autistic myself) learnd also in their childhood with different methots to behave like everyone else without understanding the meaning in it. Alot got depressev and they wherend able to handle their lifes better, it even harmed them in a way, because they never learned to understand the meaning in their behavior.
respectful way, that not only understands but respects the child's emotional developmental and individual sensory processing differences.
There is a huge difference between emotionally joining and connecting vs. "redirecting." The former is based upon an empathic developmental approach, the latter
on a simplistic behavioral approach, despite the tomes and complexity of the data. The former leads to natural expressive communication skills and higher-critical thinking, the latter ABA does not.
deepening the social communication, and along with that more natural reciprocal and nuanced facial and bodily gesturing, the separation of ideas from fixed (or catastrophic) modalities of eprception the emergence of meaningful (not mechanically re-enforced or prompted) expressive language. The great challenge is in being able to NOT direct the child but listen, slow down and tune into and join in his/her world. When we begin to do this we are meeting the child half way; in a natural and
Outcomes should not be on how to modify a child's behaviors but how to join in with a child's natural affect (or surface "behaviors" and understand his underlying sensory processing input needs). We regard them as "meaning-making" opportunities -and not as "unacceptable behaviors to be overcome." This is conveyed to the child by joining in with what he/she is doing and then once reciprocal joint attention is engaged, based upon pleasurably based interactions, we slightly vary the affect thus
There is no understanding of each child's emotional developmental levels, individual sensory processing difference or primary caregiver relatiionship patterns. Granted that
these tapes are over forty years old. However,the same rampant misconceptions (with some signs of light) are still in service. That is to say, uniformely targeting (and modifying) a child's surface behavior and labeling it as "Appropriate or inapproiate" is pathologically disturbing and developmentally naieve.
As a developmental educator/therapist that practices a comprehensive developmental approach based on DIR/Floortime, thank you for providing these clips. It is a splendid and indeed tragic inview into historically seriously misguided notions on Development
and at the same time sadism at its finest. There is no consideration (and no understanding) of following the child's natural affect and drawing him/her into emotional reciprocal and meaningful circles of communication.
uh i would hope someone like this wouldnt be doin this with my autistic child. she doesnt seem to have much patience and her loud voice is just making it work. i know this is old but i cant imagine what she would be like without the camera.....
More of something that isn't working is not better.
See video titled "Interventions for Children with Autism" by UCtelevision.
The task can be changed in terms of how you are going to teach it within operant learning theory.
DTT/NLP/NET/PRT
The range of the behavior can be broadened defining success.
For instance, if a child can't pronounce as well you can accept less clear expressive speech. Such decision can be made far quicker than a weekly evaluation.
Reed uses ABA therapy for various things due to its' usefulness (operant learning theory).
Reed,P., Osborne,L.A., & Corness,M. (2008). The real-world effectiveness of early teaching interventions for children with autistic spectrum disorders. Exceptional Children, 74, 134-134.
Reed,P., Howell,PC., Davies,S., & Osborne,LA. (2007). An operant treatment for content word dysfluencies in persistent stuttering children. J. of Stuttering Treatment Advocacy & Research.
McEachin, J., Smith, T., & Lovaas, O. I. (1993). Long-Term Outcome for Children with Autism who received Early Intensive Behavioral Treatment. American Journal of Mental Retardation, Vol. 97, No. 4, 359-372.
Did you even read the original 1987 and 1993 articles? because Lovaas had three groups of children 40 hrs a week of ABA, 10 hours a week of ABA, & other treatments.
So actually not only did Lovaas address intensity of treatment, but he concluded based on that in the direction I've been talking.
Doesn't surprise me that you don't read and just laugh at other people's brains for agreeing with the opposite camp even though the same is obviously true as an arguement.
Koegel @ UCSB states 80-90 hrs or every waking hr is best, but Lovaas only said that in the 70s, so Lovaas was intervening every waking hr, but changed his tune to not upset the government relative to what children deserve as he was put in a part of a national counsel.
EIBI is well respected as an intervention title among behaviorists as opposed to Lovaas method so I suppose the more is better is more accurate then your view, but then you know I look to the scientific publications.
Look I've answered all UR questions & I still disagree with UR complete fallacy of logic on replication which anyone can understand I'm right if they know what ABA does.
ABA is based on behavior modification where U build & decrease behaviors by conditioning (operant > classical) & it's purely scientific.
So pruning mind is far more successfully done by teaching language & how to use it then by decreasing behaviors.
Anyone can replicate it if trained appropriately. That's science for U.
I believe what is in best interest of 1 who is failing 2 learn language is teach language in ways that they learn.
Other things 2 remediate problem can B 2 teach multiple cue responsivity, initiations, imitation, play skills, joint attention, ways 2 self-manage behavior, & ways 2 control environment.
I get fact despite ABA showing way 2 teach all these things U would prefer if ABA did not have aversives in its' past. Me too. So much 4 wishing.
The question is not whether you will slap, but rather will you do what is in the best interest of another regardless of what a group might think?
You have stated Lovaas used aversives and others to not. So far the replications have not surpassed the 47%, so what is in an individuals best interest?
I say to chose the scientific method that is optimal.
"what is in the best interest of another regardless of what a group might think?"
Good question. What do those "best outcome" children from 1987, now adults, think about their childhood? Are they happy? Would they agree the ABA treatment was in their best interest?
Is is known that a second follow up was planned by Lovaas in the late nineties on the "best outcome" people from 1987 study. There were some preliminary results but the full study never materialized. Do you happen to know why?
If a best outcome child came out on T.V. saying he didn't like ABA I would compare him to a same age child who was from the same study, but now living in a mental institution and think, "Wow, ABA rocks!"
This guys working a regular job, has friends, is married, and has a bachelor degree.
It would be sad that his child has autism and he's depressed because his son can't talk, but then hating ABA and being depressed is really unrelated to evaluating ABA therapy or rightly DTT.
Oh, I got you. The opinions of even so-called "indistinguishable" individuals are not to be trusted or listened to. They cannot possibly know what is best for them. And if they come out and tell us (the ABA therapists) that the therapy they received long ago was no good we (the ABA therapists) shall tell them to shut up and be quiet. It is for us (ABA therapists) to know what is the best for them. Those "indistinguishable" are still distinguished as sub-humans who have no say in these matters.
I get UR pt on 13% not being "recovery" many have argued what it means, but Gernsbacher is placing 13% from Smith in completely scientific study & stating it was 13% who became "indistinguishable."
Lovaas put word "recovery" over a chart in the 1987 article & stated it isn't a recovery, but optimal outcome. Can anyone else get this outcome in a scientific study not doing ABA procedures?
There are many replications of Lovaas, but not even a first article from any other intervention.
Gernsbacher acknowledges that the methodology used in the Smith study was up to the standard. This does not mean that Gernsbacher signs under each word including the one chosen by the authors to denote the "best outcome" case (continued below).
Smith et al in all honesty tried to do the best ABA research ever and be as objective as possible to address various criticisms other professionals in the field expressed about the Lovaas (1987) study. 13% success of their quality research is certainly more convincing than 47% of the rather questionable 1987 study by Lovaas.
Well, in all honesty autismvid, with no formal education I helped nonverbal nephew at 3 & 1/2 yrs old who stimmed & was highly aggressive become "indistinguishable" & this to me says maybe Lovaas knows what he is talking about.
If U call it a single case, then I've replicated my single case study twice.
DTT/PRT/NLP R treatments I like.
Rethink UR "questionable" comment Smith got his education from Lovaas on how 2 treat.
So did I indirectly & just about every professional out there.
Single case study is hard to verify. Your nephew did not speak by 3.5, you used ABA and he became "indistinguishable". And I knew of a girl who did not speak by 3, by 3.5 started first words and close to 4 became completely verbal without any ABA intervention. Had you started ABA with her most probably she would become "indistinguishable". And then you would toot your horn and claim the ABA victory, right?
I think U can't make connections based on hypothesis, but then UR not scientific.
I did NLP or NET, then a home program began.
Did this girl not talk with other adults until they did DTT with her? My nephew generalized to other adults only after home program. Then & only then did it generalize to untrained adults.
Then no talk with peers until 6 peers trained & then he was trained to initiate talk to 6 untrained peers & then finally he spoke to untrained peers with no intervention.
Boy, I did mess up I wrote, "There were no DTTs done for that girl."
What I meant, "No ABA was used 2 teach language & she generalized her words 2 others once she learned them as opposed 2 needing intervention 2 generalize speech 2 other adults & intervention 2 teach how 2 speak 2 children & how 2 initiate his own speech."
Thank U 4 helping me clear up how my nephew with autism is different from girl who just didn't speak at 3 yrs old like Einstein who both never had autism.
Smith proved to you scientifically that 13% of people with minimal effort can be indistinguishable and you find no value in the fact his teacher nearly thirty years earlier showed that by working every waking hour with the same intervention as Smith 47% can be indistinguishable.
Oh yeah you believe what non-behaviorists have to say about what is the best way to provide ABA. Logical, I guess...NOT.
Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention ... look into that term.
"13% of people with minimal effort can be indistinguishable... his teacher thirty years earlier showed that by working every waking hour with the same intervention as Smith 47% can be indistinguishable.
I fancy what would be the percentage of success if one were to do 168 hours a week of "Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention" 80%? 90%?
"Oh yeah you believe what non-behaviorists have to say about what is the best way to provide ABA. Logical, I guess...NOT."
You are quite wrong. The Lovaas 1987 study was criticized mostly within the behaviorist community by other specialists in the field. Smith is a behaviorist. Howlin is behaviorist as well as many others.
Lovaas, O. I., & Smith, T. (1989). A comprehensive behavioral theory of autistic children: Paradigm for research and treatment. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 20, 17-29.
"Smith proved ... that 13% of people with minimal effort can be indistinguishable his teacher ... showed ... 47% can be indistinguishable."
Do you know why Smith chose 25 hours/week? Was it, you think, because he was a lazy lot unlike Dr Lovaas?
And, once again, the question of intensity was never experimentally addressed by Lovaas. It was addressed recently by Reed (2007). The study by Sallows & Groupner (compare the intensity experimental and the control groups)indirectly suggests the same.
High functioning autism scores high on non-verbal and low on verbal.
Aspergers scores high on verbal and low on non-verbal.
My nephew scored low on both and couldn't talk.
But he has high functioning autism and always was, but they didn't know how to test him.
Koegel, R., & Mentis, M. (1985). Annotation; Motivation in Childhood Autism: Can they or won't they? Jour. of Child Psychol. Psychiat., Vol. 26, No. 2, 185-191.
Ask specifics from his mom, but I believe noncompliance played into scores so what would they prove.
He would be HFA today & "indistinguishable."
Do U know of kid who wasn't talking & by intervention learned 2 talk, but intervention took yrs & became "indistinguishable" slowly over those yrs? I know 6. How many do U know & what was intervention?
If U don't then that explains alot.
U insult intervention in 70s helps children with autism from Lovaas. Pick one from 70s. Name better now.
Does prayer figure in distinguishing interventions that effectively teach?
Look to the realm of science. U can punish behaviors by removing attention. That is an intervention, but non-defining of an intervention that teaches language so 1 who is mute has discerning mind. Lovaas focus 85% on language.
I suppose U have different conditioning. Perhaps an intervention can help.
I suggest cracking open books & journals. Get some sweat to appear on the brow by thinking critically.
Swallows, Smith, and many other professionals WERE UNABLE TO "REPLICATE". Are you sure you actually read the articles or have you just "cracked them open"? ;)
Oh, I forgot. Did you "use YOUR brain" when you "read" the articles by Swallows, Smith, and many other professionals? Or have you used brain borrowed from Dr.Lovaas? ;)
Victoria Shea (Autism, Vol. 8, No. 4, 349-367 (2004)) analyzed various ABA studies, including the so-called "replications". "Crack it open" and start "thinking critically" (citations follows) ;)
"It is time for advocates and professionals to stop citing the figure of 47 percent and the concepts of 'normal functioning', being 'indistinguishable from average children', and having 'recovered' from autism. The reports of the initial research are not consistent with these interpretations; further, over three decades since the research began, other studies have consistently fallen short of the 47 percent figure."
I hope you learn what works if you have a kid with autism who is failing to learn language.
If not I hope my words below help others.
I know it helped many children I worked with and for a handful even "indistinguishability" and I am not even formally trained, but I've read a great deal on the subject.
Hundreds of books and thousands of journal articles.
I think if 1 watches videos 1 can see idea of intervention & procedures extrapolated towards language & defined in the 1977 book R solid work in teaching language based on operant learning theory.
Procedures R based on how all learn language only so quickly as 2 make obviousness of procedures hard 2 see until looked at with those who learn slower.
U can either determine 2 teach slow learners or chose another intervention not scientific.
Your forgot to mention 13% indistinguishable by Smith, the only randomized controlled study in the history of ABA. And 25 hours/week should be better than 40 hours/week, according to Reed's (2007) study (see above) and yet it is only 13%.
Please realize for all your high mindedness we are speaking of the past where people thought these children were uneducatable as opposed to sophisticated people who make their own U-tube videos.
The people slapping the child's leg cared about the child & in fact the child avoided future abuse as YAP results are 47% "indistinguishable", 68% regular IQ, & 89% learning functional language.
Meanwhile in institutions across America those beating you love to talk about were really happening.
Contingent aversives were employed in the Lovaas (1987) study. Many states now prohibit the use of aversives, and many parents object to such treatment. Either of these factors could prevent replication of the Lovaas (1987) study. However, although the UCLA Young Autism Project no longer uses aversives, we have taken advantage of alternatives to aversives developed during and after the time of the 1987 study was completed.
"To beat", according to the English dictionary, means "to hit repeatedly". If a child is hit several times within an ABA session, means the child was beaten.
The discussion deviated into philological exercises. Whether one calls it "beating" or "hitting" is immaterial. The Lovaas (1987) study employed aversives which are no longer
in use. The study therefore cannot be replicated, as admitted by Lovaas himself. Your "double digit articles published on replication of Lovaas" was clearly wrong.
It was about the 1987 study. That what we discussed. To do the replication of the 1987 study, one has to follow the protocol closely. This cannot be done, therefore the study was not replicated. Nobody claimed they REPLICATED the Lovaas (1987) study because a number of things not just aversives were done differently.
Carr, E. G., & Lovaas, O. I. (1983). Contingent electric shock as a treatment for severe behavior problems In S. Axelrod & J. Apsche (Eds.) . The Effects of Punishment on Human Behavior, (pp. 221-245). New York, Acedemic Press.
"First off beatings never happened under Lovaas."
"Enraged bellows at the boy, then a sharp slap in the face. This deliberate, calculated harshness is part of an extraordinary new treatment for mentally crippled children."
(Screams, Slaps & Love "A surprising, shocking treatment helps far-gone mental cripples" Life Magazine, 1965). Please also check the photographs. All this happened under Ivar Lovaas.
Lovaas used electoshock in 60s, slap to face in 60s, slap to leg in 70s. None of this is beatings. Documentation of beatings is pretty bad. I know. Children in foster care could tell you what a beating is & I bet they could tell those in 70s cared for children with autism as they have intelligence unlike you.
They would be wow-ed to see children unable to speak as shown in footage now able & desire that for themselves. Adults who care.
Please show me your documented evidence of beatings.
Do you know what force was used by Lovaas or his associates when slapping the child into the face? And how many times was it done repeatedly?
No, I did not see the documentation. That is why I am asking you, who have read it. So my questions again: "How harshly should one slap a child into the face and how many times to make it qualify as beating?"
Treatment in the Lovaas, 1987, study took place between 1970 and 1984. Source: Lovaas, O.I . (2002) Teaching individuals with developmental delays: Basic intervention techniques. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
"You focus on the "non-random" I focus on what matters."
It is not me who thinks that randomized trial matters. This important criterion was developed as a standard by scientific community for the sake of being objective. Nobody would believe a new drug efficacy if its action was not studied in a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized way. The same principle applies to any therapeutic study including ABA.
If you "use YOUR brain" instead of borrowing one from Dr Lovaas, you may find out some interesting details of the Lovaas (1987) study. Somebody already went into trouble to examine carefully various inconsistencies (citation follows):
"Smith et al. (1997) correctly report that all children with ratio IQs of less than 37 were excluded from Lovaas (1987). That is, none of the experimental group children in Lovaas (1987) was in the "severely retarded" range at intake. This is contrary to what is stated in Lovaas (1987), where it is reported that 10 children--the majority--are in this range."
I have brain & UR not saying something I don't know relative 2 information about Lovaas & truthful.
Show me other study in world with children all having IQs proving MR & then intervention such that 68% have regular IQ & 47% indistinguishable from society both in various intellectual & various social assessments all tested by outside source pre & post.
U can't because only ABA is scientific & that is why there R replications & 600 scientific articles showing ABA as efficacious.
Gernsbacher states that Smith's replication with 13% recovery is scientifically valid in every aspect, but intervention was 25 hrs a wk.
More intervention better as Lovaas' 1987 & 1993 article just as scientific & though not random in selection was evaluated by Donald M. Baer (founder of ABA) & found random by him. For Lovaas 47% recovered because they got 40 hrs a wk or more.
Replication sites have published & there R now double digit articles published on replication of Lovaas.
1. "Gernsbacher states that Smith's replication with 13% recovery is scientifically valid ... but intervention was 25 hrs a wk."
Gernsbacher never stated that the ABA therapy has zero efficiency. She rather finds clear inconsistencies between exaggerated claims, such as by Lovaas (1987) with some other ABA studies. The study by Smith is the ONLY EXISTING RANDOMIZED TRIAL study in ABA. The study by Lovaas did not satisfy one important criterion which immediately undermines its strong statement.
3. "was evaluated by Donald M. Baer (founder of ABA) & found random by him"
The study was not randomized by design. If whoever asserts it is random does not make it random. Please provide the reference to Donald M. Baer's published opinion.
4. "More intervention better" & "For Lovaas 47% recovered because they got 40 hrs a wk or more."
There is no experimental evidence that "more intervention (is) better" above 20 hours/wk level: there is no positive correlation found between the total number of ABA hours and the positive outcome. On the contrary, the
study by Reed et al (2007) suggests that too many hours of the ABA therapy (20, 30, 40 hours compared) have rather negative impact. (J Autism Dev Disord (2007) 37:1815--1821).
4. "More intervention better" & "For Lovaas 47% recovered because they got 40 hrs a wk or more."
(continued) Reed et al conclude: "within the high-intensity group there was an inverse relationship between the temporal input and the gains." Study by Sallows & Graupner (2005) did not confirm the positive correlation either. Amazingly, the control group, which received fewer hours of therapy and less supervision by the trained ABA therapists outperformed the test group.
5. "Replication sites have published & there R now double digit articles published on replication of Lovaas."
"Replication of Lovaas" would mean one test group with 40 hours of ABA of the kind used by the time, including aversives
(beating, electric shock etc), versus the control group receiving 10 hours of some non-specified therapy. There were no replication studies of the Lovaas's (1987)
study, to my knowledge. If you know of such replications, please provide the references.
YAP did not employ beatings, electric shock, or slaps to face.
So replication would be 40+ hours of discrete trial training or operant conditioning focused on language 85% or more of the time, started between the age of 2 to 4 yrs old & lasting 2 to 6 years.
There are over 12 replication publications & of like intervention.
Even more replication sites.
ABA has professionals who meet every yr to determine how to best help people with autism by scientific procedures since 1974.
The 1987 study included aversives. Hitting or beating is of no consequence. The 1987 study included control group, receiving 10 hours of some non-specified therapy. I did not see any new studies of the kind. Please provide the references.
You write: "Replication sites have published & there R now double digit articles published on replication of Lovaas."
Lovaas (2002) writes: "Many states now prohibit the use of aversives, and many parents object to such treatment. Either of these factors could prevent replication of the Lovaas (1987)"
Lovaas clearly states that the aversives are unlikely to be a critical component of the intervention and surely you are aware that discrete trial training is what Lovaas did and what others are doing minus the aversives.
Surely you are aware that would be replication or are you unaware of the difference between ABA and DTT?
If you wish to understand the value of aversives you would need to do a specific study.
Sure, I'll buy that.
The use of aversives is prohibited and so a replication with aversives might be difficult, but that does not eliminate the possibility of replicating his language intervention which many have done.
Why am I arguing to prove something that is obvious?
Until the role of aversives in the 1987 study remains unknown because of the lack of the experimental studies the word "replication" has little meaning. Lovaas understands it, I understand it. You do not seem to understand it.
"replicating his language intervention which many have done."
ABA is different than other interventions 4 children with autism. While other autism treatments may travel the country & put on a large number of conferences 2 advertise their techniques, ABA has professionals from throughout the world gather on a consistent basis (since 1974) specifically 2 review & advance methods & strategies 4 the benefit of children with autism.
The 600 articles R sound & there R many more articles on ABA techniques reviewing other treatment methods that aren't sound.
The fact that other therapeutic interventions do not have much scientific standing does not mean ABA is automatically liberated from valid criticisms, some of which I tried to emphasize. ABA is not a religion and it does not need a belief to sustain itself. For its own scientific good and has to be more sensitive to critical arguments than to a praise (which is mostly self-praise).
The "600 articles" argument is repetitious and getting worn out. I would suggest to
read Dr. Morton Ann Gernsbacher article ("Is One Style of Early Behavioral Treatment for Autism "Scientifically Proven"? J. Developmental and Learning Disorders, 2003)
I read this 1 by Gernsbacher. I will not strain at a gnat 2 figure out if there is something 2 defend. If there is an attack it is so weak as 2 B useless. Kind of like your comment on other interventions.
People who don't attack ABA with strong argument do so because they don't want 2 seem foolish 2 the scientific community.
There is reason 4 that. Go with it.
Maybe science has begun 2 understand human behavior. What I believe is ABA is not a religion, but rather...read my moniker.
Would you prove the "attack" (or whatever) by Gernsbacher is weak? Please do so in a very concrete way. I would like to see concrete contra-arguments, not the evasive and superfluous statements.
Gernsbacher article states science and proof is demanded by ABA. Has that article done the same?
Gernsbacher article states 1 article as completely scientific & states that 13% recovery was achieved. What U ignore is that it's statistically significant that only 2% spontaneous recover irregardless of treatment?
Note your article supposedly attacking ABA says ABA causes recovery. Times have changed to still be considered a professional while attacking ABA.
Well, look at the article and see what the 13% is refering to for Smith, what the 47% for Lovaas is referring to (1987, 1993), and what the 33% is referring to in most replications.
You will find it related to "indistinguishable" and so if you wish to fight over words please join the rest of the world the documentation of what was accomplished was not done in a secret corner.
Another article to read: "Can early interventions alter the course of autism?" by Dr. Patricia Howlin published in the book "Autism: Neural basis and treatment possibilities" (Wiley, 2003) with the appended discussion.
Koegel at UCSB talks about Natural Language Paradigm & Pivotal Response Training.
They prove their intervention by single case design with ABA criteria of proving things by reversals, multiple baseline design, & other scientific procedures.
True, Koegels don't have randomized control trial setup, but procedures R scientific.
It is unethical 2 refuse treatment & control groups R hard 2 come by due 2 eclectic treatment options & people seeking out ABA due to its' proven track record.
Autismvid writes, "U should know better than me that out of those 600 articles very few would pass stringent criteria of the scientific research (the randomized control trial setup)."
I would know that ABA requires single case design, multiple baseline, reversals & other scientific procedures & so all of them would pass scientific stringent criteria because that is what ABA is my friend.
Intervention Lovaas did was discrete trial training, but method 4 proving intervention useful is ABA.
Lovaas, O. I., Koegel, R. L., & Schreibman, L. Experimental studies in child schizophrenia (Research Project MH-11440-07). National Institute of Mental Health, 1973.
Child learns 2 talk & then learns 2 not talk is like saying, "The apple is ripe because it is red." Glad U understand it.
Some people don't even admit that conditioning is learning. U don't even buy that pre & post synaps in brain R connected by classical & operant conditioning.
Key feature is conditioning 2 remediate autism. I suggest looking 2 behaviorism 4 proven treatment, which U don't deny.
People think & thus conditioning continues with nothing 2 observe.
Your statements become too abrupt and disconnected. They are impossible to follow.
If you did not understand what my analogy meant I shall make and effort explain it better. There is one behavioral fact "child regresses" and another behavioral fact that the same child has "stimulus overselectivity". If those happen to be external behavioral properties of the same child does not mean one is the cause of the other.
1st quick all answering comment then gave U 4 books 2 understand behaviorism if U wish. Finally, grant 2 show Koegel's work & Lovaas' R similar.
Child has "stimulus overselectivity" so child hears words & vocalizes. Child has "stimulus overselectivity" so conditioning of words is not strengthened. Child is conditioned 2 not talk = regressive autism.
If "stimulus overselectivity" was real strong then no talking at all as child would perceive enriched environment as completely non-enriched.
Some of them might be born with it some of them may develop it with time. The developmental failure by the age of 3 might be pre-programmed by the deleterious mutations in the child's genome. Those might be responsible for the death of the Purkinje cells or mirror neurons in the child's brain. There might be some biomedical means to prevent or stop this process it but they are yet to be discovered.
Does this mean that children with autism are conditioned over time to exhibit stimulus overselectivity or that stimulus overselectivity conditions children down a different conditioning path?
If a child with autism exhibits speech they can learn "ba" but be unaware of the salient stimulus required to get a bottle.
Hence, a typical baby can learn to find mother to get the reinforcement, while the child with autism is conditioned to give up on speech.
It means that a child cannot distinguish sounds. For example, "ba" and "da" or "ga" may sound all the same. Behaviorally it may mean, for example, that you teach a child colors through ABA, and 3 years later he/she still mixes them up. I am not sure how this relates to "stimulus overselectivity" or if there is any connection at all. I am not even sure how stimuli are counted. In my mind there is always more than one stimulus in any given environment.
Then you take the same child (and I mean one very concrete child) after three years of ABA and do BioMAP test which provides an objective measure of the child's inability to distinguish sounds. This is an important piece of information for changing the course of the therapy to the given child (either through Fast Forword) or music lessons to target this concrete defect. My point is one has to look inside and one has to diagnose the problem instead of just doing DTs till blue in the face.
Is there any intervention that remediates this CAPD that you speak of and how many people have been shown to exhibit CAPD and is there different types of CAPD in terms of how it is observed to affect individuals in controlled studies with reversals and multiple baseline studies.
Not many children with autism are routinely tested with any objective means, including BioMAP, functional MRI or biochemical tests. The tests are not cheap and most doctors("specialists") are either completely unaware of available tools or they do not believe they are worth the trouble. For most of them labeling child autistic does the trick.
Check this one:
Merzenich et al (1996). Temporal processing deficits of language-learning impaired children ameliorated by training. Science, 271, 77-81.
I like your Merzenich reference. I will quote him now:
"These studies have shown that the ability of an adult animal to make fine distinctions about the temporal or spectral features of complex inputs can be sharply improved, or degraded, by a period of intensive behavioral training."
It is true that any behavior can be strengthened or weakened by intensive behavioral training and indeed if it is intensive enough and early enough there is no regression.
Lovaas, O. I., & Schreibman, L. (1971). Stimulus Overselectivity of Autistic Children in a Two-Stimulus Situation. Behavior Research & Therapy, Vol. 9, 305-310.
Koegel, R. L., & Schreibman, L. (1977). Teaching autistic children to respond to simultaneous multiple cues. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 24, 299-311.
How do you know that the only treatment that can remediate CAPD is ABA at least by proven research?
My other problem with the Behavioral Science is that it is completely ignorant of other sciences. One example, many kids labeled autistic (whatever this means) suffer from central auditory processing disorder. The underlying cause for that is that their brain stem does not process sound information correctly. There are objective means (BioMAP test) developed to test brainstem functionality which do not rely on the verbal response from the child and therapies to correct it (Fast ForWord program)
Completely unempathic. Early horrible abusive dog training under the name of "Science."
Neilgs 8 months ago
It's amazing how difficult teaching was before prompt and prompt fading and errorless learning came about.
Missfoxize 10 months ago
As an advocate for ABA (please keep the safety on, those of you brandishing guns), I have to say these videos reflect the limited knowledge we had about learning and teaching at the time. These tapes are not a true reflection of what ABA looks like today and to suggest that is just scare mongering.
vegemite34 1 year ago 3
Comment removed
vegemite34 1 year ago
Oh for gracious sakes! That "therapist" reminds me of Gordon Ramsey of "Hell's Kitchen"! The way they just yell at the kids like that, I see it as no different than the way Ramsey yells at the contestants on his show.
sleckrone1 1 year ago
It feels meaningless for DAnte to point to the black - WHY om earth should he do that??????
mamalusk 1 year ago
No matter how you turn it, define it, place it Deceptively under the very convincing and seductive guise of "scientifically proven" (which, when we properly deconstruct application and terminology translates into scientifically proven modified target SURFACE BEHAVIORS, and has nada to do with recent decades in neurosciences (specifically neuroplasticity), where neuronal connections between the limbic system (e.g., amgydala, all or nothing catastrophic actions) and prefrontal cortex
Neilgs 1 year ago
or prais (I see it, I want it, how do I get it), is by first clinically and empathically recognizing sensory-based challenges (hyporeactivity, hyperactivity or mixed-reactivities in various visual spatial, proprioceptive, vestibular, auditory and tactile domains) beneath external behavioral differences) and by primary caregivers following the child's lead and clinically, developmentally and empathically attributing affect (emotional) meaning to the child's non-injurious perseverative behaviors
Neilgs 1 year ago
Joint attention/shared attention is then established in a meaningful way. In a manner where spontaneous integration, as we (unlike this video and much ABA to present), are deepening affect regulated circles of communication (preverbal foundation of deepening attachment and expanding emotional signaling) that supports the child's emerging autonomy. What we are seeing here i(in these videos) are not only the antithesis of complex and comprehensive neurodevelopmental understanding and
Neilgs 1 year ago
approach, but I dare say, to the apparent outrage of many who would defend otherwise, borders on or is child abuse; however, well intentioned it is the quintessential opposite of an empathic and clinically well informed (functional emotional developmental milestones, individuate sensory processing differences and caregiver and clinician relationship based patterns, which would begin to constitute a comprehensive DEVELOPMENTAL based approach, as opposed to "scientifically targeting
Neilgs 1 year ago
surface behaviors."
Neilgs 1 year ago
All of it is NAZI, no matter how you dress it up, it is behavour correctional facilities for disabled children who are NOT ABLE to respond INSTANTLY and to teach them INSTANT GRATIFICATION is to reinforce tantrums - this is all wrong ANYONE DOING ASA is sick and brainwashed !!!
jonessmithGB 1 year ago
as an ABA teacher with austic children i can say we DO NOT use this first womans form of teaching. as for what we actually teach we teach them how to learn to me it seems as thought many of you need an education as to what we as behaviorists do and how autsim works please before you comment do a little research ABA is the leading thearpy for a reason
jennataylor2 1 year ago
Comment removed
Sawbin10 1 year ago
@jennataylor2 if Lovaas' claims that after ABA 47% of children with autism end up 'indistinguishable' from their peers, why is there still such high demand for school age and adult services? hmm...
by the way, children are NOT 'autistic'. They are people with autism, there is a difference and maybe YOU should be the one getting an education.
Sawbin10 1 year ago
This video is years old, nobody does ABA like this anymore.
bopplayer 1 year ago
But they're not learning!!!
The first clip was just a disaster. How did that woman get her job?
The other clips were useless. Kids are not animals. Constantly telling them "do this" and having them imitate behaviors like tapping their shoulders isn't teaching them anything that has any purpose. Plus, good grief, most of those so-called therapists used such harsh voices for no reason and totally terrified the children!
MsSourGrapes 1 year ago
@MsSourGrapes my son and I have been hounded and tortured for trying to expose Lovaas and cruelty- Lovaas is nothing but a eugenics promoting nazi and sadistic hater of children- these children are being exploited in MANY WAYS
jonessmithGB 1 year ago
scary videos!! what did these ppl think they were actually achieving????? this is emotional abuse and mental cruelty. my son has autism & i can't watch this in full. too distressing. the autistic way of being is no less valid than the NT perspective. start with acceptance instead of trying to squeeze square pegs in to round holes!! esp if the square pegs in question are happy being square :) whats normal anyway??? certainly not the so called teachers in this video...sadists for sure. scary.
urbanangel13 1 year ago
so many educators need help understanding how to work with these children, and how to identify sensory integration impairments (there are many different types, different levels of severity)...good to see progress being made in this area. now let's see where they go with the interweaving of symptoms between autism spectrum and ADHD, etc. lots of overlap!
Katryd1 1 year ago
she sucks as a therapist =[
jessicalynnharris 2 years ago
This young woman is violating the child aggressively. If Í was watching Id have a hard time not slapping her.
Imagine how well he could do if he didnt have to expend energy avoiding eyecontact. Or if he was allowed to use his energy doing the tasks, instead of relation to the woman grapping his hands all the time.
BumsenDK 2 years ago
There are soooooooooooooo many things she is doing wrong. Glad to see ABA progress from this annoying crap.....
gotscreens 2 years ago
we are studying this video in my language development class and its a good use of modeling but with kids with this kind of severity requires a certain finess and caring that this person isnt using
amarie1920 3 years ago
Has any of you ever worked with autistic children, with different degress of severity, and seen the improvement and big differences it can produce to real lives?
16cT 3 years ago
The children just learn to imitate, but not the understanding in their behavior.
Some autistic friends of mine (I'm autistic myself) learnd also in their childhood with different methots to behave like everyone else without understanding the meaning in it. Alot got depressev and they wherend able to handle their lifes better, it even harmed them in a way, because they never learned to understand the meaning in their behavior.
GingerAutie 3 years ago 2
Comment removed
Katryd1 1 year ago
respectful way, that not only understands but respects the child's emotional developmental and individual sensory processing differences.
There is a huge difference between emotionally joining and connecting vs. "redirecting." The former is based upon an empathic developmental approach, the latter
on a simplistic behavioral approach, despite the tomes and complexity of the data. The former leads to natural expressive communication skills and higher-critical thinking, the latter ABA does not.
Neilgs 3 years ago
deepening the social communication, and along with that more natural reciprocal and nuanced facial and bodily gesturing, the separation of ideas from fixed (or catastrophic) modalities of eprception the emergence of meaningful (not mechanically re-enforced or prompted) expressive language. The great challenge is in being able to NOT direct the child but listen, slow down and tune into and join in his/her world. When we begin to do this we are meeting the child half way; in a natural and
Neilgs 3 years ago
Outcomes should not be on how to modify a child's behaviors but how to join in with a child's natural affect (or surface "behaviors" and understand his underlying sensory processing input needs). We regard them as "meaning-making" opportunities -and not as "unacceptable behaviors to be overcome." This is conveyed to the child by joining in with what he/she is doing and then once reciprocal joint attention is engaged, based upon pleasurably based interactions, we slightly vary the affect thus
Neilgs 3 years ago
There is no understanding of each child's emotional developmental levels, individual sensory processing difference or primary caregiver relatiionship patterns. Granted that
these tapes are over forty years old. However,the same rampant misconceptions (with some signs of light) are still in service. That is to say, uniformely targeting (and modifying) a child's surface behavior and labeling it as "Appropriate or inapproiate" is pathologically disturbing and developmentally naieve.
Neilgs 3 years ago
As a developmental educator/therapist that practices a comprehensive developmental approach based on DIR/Floortime, thank you for providing these clips. It is a splendid and indeed tragic inview into historically seriously misguided notions on Development
and at the same time sadism at its finest. There is no consideration (and no understanding) of following the child's natural affect and drawing him/her into emotional reciprocal and meaningful circles of communication.
Neilgs 3 years ago
uh i would hope someone like this wouldnt be doin this with my autistic child. she doesnt seem to have much patience and her loud voice is just making it work. i know this is old but i cant imagine what she would be like without the camera.....
CHRISSYHICKS 3 years ago
U were right on 1 thing.
More of something that isn't working is not better.
See video titled "Interventions for Children with Autism" by UCtelevision.
The task can be changed in terms of how you are going to teach it within operant learning theory.
DTT/NLP/NET/PRT
The range of the behavior can be broadened defining success.
For instance, if a child can't pronounce as well you can accept less clear expressive speech. Such decision can be made far quicker than a weekly evaluation.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Reed uses ABA therapy for various things due to its' usefulness (operant learning theory).
Reed,P., Osborne,L.A., & Corness,M. (2008). The real-world effectiveness of early teaching interventions for children with autistic spectrum disorders. Exceptional Children, 74, 134-134.
Reed,P., Howell,PC., Davies,S., & Osborne,LA. (2007). An operant treatment for content word dysfluencies in persistent stuttering children. J. of Stuttering Treatment Advocacy & Research.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
We can debate whether Wales is cutting edge in scientific interventions like ABA therapy for autism. Or more likely Discrete Trial Training.
Suffice it to say the training of therapists from consultants was less than UCLA.
Sorry, but I don't think you have a point for throwing out the idea of Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention based on the Reed article.
Go see my latest favorited article, you might like the ending.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
McEachin, J., Smith, T., & Lovaas, O. I. (1993). Long-Term Outcome for Children with Autism who received Early Intensive Behavioral Treatment. American Journal of Mental Retardation, Vol. 97, No. 4, 359-372.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
autismvid,
Did you even read the original 1987 and 1993 articles? because Lovaas had three groups of children 40 hrs a week of ABA, 10 hours a week of ABA, & other treatments.
So actually not only did Lovaas address intensity of treatment, but he concluded based on that in the direction I've been talking.
Doesn't surprise me that you don't read and just laugh at other people's brains for agreeing with the opposite camp even though the same is obviously true as an arguement.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Koegel @ UCSB states 80-90 hrs or every waking hr is best, but Lovaas only said that in the 70s, so Lovaas was intervening every waking hr, but changed his tune to not upset the government relative to what children deserve as he was put in a part of a national counsel.
EIBI is well respected as an intervention title among behaviorists as opposed to Lovaas method so I suppose the more is better is more accurate then your view, but then you know I look to the scientific publications.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Now I've stated I was done, but you keep replying to me and attacking.
Write your banter so you can get me to the second page if you want, but don't get it to fall on my e-mail account or I might defend myself.
But I might not either, but it has nothing to do with avoiding a question and rather it is the donkey affect that I'm trying to avoid.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Look I've answered all UR questions & I still disagree with UR complete fallacy of logic on replication which anyone can understand I'm right if they know what ABA does.
ABA is based on behavior modification where U build & decrease behaviors by conditioning (operant > classical) & it's purely scientific.
So pruning mind is far more successfully done by teaching language & how to use it then by decreasing behaviors.
Anyone can replicate it if trained appropriately. That's science for U.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
You keep repeating words "scientific" & "science". They seem to fascinate you.
Do you feel using them makes your arguments stronger? Were you ever doing science yourself? Just curious.
autismvid 3 years ago
Would you know autism when you saw it?
Would you know it relative to disconnects in generalization of learning or are you oblivous to what autism is?
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
I believe what is in best interest of 1 who is failing 2 learn language is teach language in ways that they learn.
Other things 2 remediate problem can B 2 teach multiple cue responsivity, initiations, imitation, play skills, joint attention, ways 2 self-manage behavior, & ways 2 control environment.
I get fact despite ABA showing way 2 teach all these things U would prefer if ABA did not have aversives in its' past. Me too. So much 4 wishing.
I guess our focus is different.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
The question is not whether you will slap, but rather will you do what is in the best interest of another regardless of what a group might think?
You have stated Lovaas used aversives and others to not. So far the replications have not surpassed the 47%, so what is in an individuals best interest?
I say to chose the scientific method that is optimal.
Try looking to Koegel and Schreibman for that.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
"what is in the best interest of another regardless of what a group might think?"
Good question. What do those "best outcome" children from 1987, now adults, think about their childhood? Are they happy? Would they agree the ABA treatment was in their best interest?
Is is known that a second follow up was planned by Lovaas in the late nineties on the "best outcome" people from 1987 study. There were some preliminary results but the full study never materialized. Do you happen to know why?
autismvid 3 years ago
If a best outcome child came out on T.V. saying he didn't like ABA I would compare him to a same age child who was from the same study, but now living in a mental institution and think, "Wow, ABA rocks!"
This guys working a regular job, has friends, is married, and has a bachelor degree.
It would be sad that his child has autism and he's depressed because his son can't talk, but then hating ABA and being depressed is really unrelated to evaluating ABA therapy or rightly DTT.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Oh, I got you. The opinions of even so-called "indistinguishable" individuals are not to be trusted or listened to. They cannot possibly know what is best for them. And if they come out and tell us (the ABA therapists) that the therapy they received long ago was no good we (the ABA therapists) shall tell them to shut up and be quiet. It is for us (ABA therapists) to know what is the best for them. Those "indistinguishable" are still distinguished as sub-humans who have no say in these matters.
autismvid 3 years ago
If their counterparts are in mental institutions and mute their opinion can't even be heard.
If they can talk and get a college degree that is something to give credence to the intervention.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
I get UR pt on 13% not being "recovery" many have argued what it means, but Gernsbacher is placing 13% from Smith in completely scientific study & stating it was 13% who became "indistinguishable."
Lovaas put word "recovery" over a chart in the 1987 article & stated it isn't a recovery, but optimal outcome. Can anyone else get this outcome in a scientific study not doing ABA procedures?
There are many replications of Lovaas, but not even a first article from any other intervention.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Gernsbacher acknowledges that the methodology used in the Smith study was up to the standard. This does not mean that Gernsbacher signs under each word including the one chosen by the authors to denote the "best outcome" case (continued below).
autismvid 3 years ago
Smith et al in all honesty tried to do the best ABA research ever and be as objective as possible to address various criticisms other professionals in the field expressed about the Lovaas (1987) study. 13% success of their quality research is certainly more convincing than 47% of the rather questionable 1987 study by Lovaas.
autismvid 3 years ago
Well, in all honesty autismvid, with no formal education I helped nonverbal nephew at 3 & 1/2 yrs old who stimmed & was highly aggressive become "indistinguishable" & this to me says maybe Lovaas knows what he is talking about.
If U call it a single case, then I've replicated my single case study twice.
DTT/PRT/NLP R treatments I like.
Rethink UR "questionable" comment Smith got his education from Lovaas on how 2 treat.
So did I indirectly & just about every professional out there.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Was your nephew diagnosed with autism?
Single case study is hard to verify. Your nephew did not speak by 3.5, you used ABA and he became "indistinguishable". And I knew of a girl who did not speak by 3, by 3.5 started first words and close to 4 became completely verbal without any ABA intervention. Had you started ABA with her most probably she would become "indistinguishable". And then you would toot your horn and claim the ABA victory, right?
autismvid 3 years ago
I think U can't make connections based on hypothesis, but then UR not scientific.
I did NLP or NET, then a home program began.
Did this girl not talk with other adults until they did DTT with her? My nephew generalized to other adults only after home program. Then & only then did it generalize to untrained adults.
Then no talk with peers until 6 peers trained & then he was trained to initiate talk to 6 untrained peers & then finally he spoke to untrained peers with no intervention.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
There were no DTTs done for that girl.
"I think U can't make connections based on hypothesis, but then UR not scientific."
What connections? Connections with what? What hypothesis? Did you "use YOUR head" when you wrote this sentence?
autismvid 3 years ago
Boy, I did mess up I wrote, "There were no DTTs done for that girl."
What I meant, "No ABA was used 2 teach language & she generalized her words 2 others once she learned them as opposed 2 needing intervention 2 generalize speech 2 other adults & intervention 2 teach how 2 speak 2 children & how 2 initiate his own speech."
Thank U 4 helping me clear up how my nephew with autism is different from girl who just didn't speak at 3 yrs old like Einstein who both never had autism.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
"Smith got his education from Lovaas on how 2 treat."
So what? Does it, by itself, make his research better or worse? What's the point?
"Rethink UR "questionable" comment"
Are you able to be logical and write in a coherent way?
autismvid 3 years ago
Smith proved to you scientifically that 13% of people with minimal effort can be indistinguishable and you find no value in the fact his teacher nearly thirty years earlier showed that by working every waking hour with the same intervention as Smith 47% can be indistinguishable.
Oh yeah you believe what non-behaviorists have to say about what is the best way to provide ABA. Logical, I guess...NOT.
Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention ... look into that term.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
"13% of people with minimal effort can be indistinguishable... his teacher thirty years earlier showed that by working every waking hour with the same intervention as Smith 47% can be indistinguishable.
I fancy what would be the percentage of success if one were to do 168 hours a week of "Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention" 80%? 90%?
autismvid 3 years ago
"Oh yeah you believe what non-behaviorists have to say about what is the best way to provide ABA. Logical, I guess...NOT."
You are quite wrong. The Lovaas 1987 study was criticized mostly within the behaviorist community by other specialists in the field. Smith is a behaviorist. Howlin is behaviorist as well as many others.
autismvid 3 years ago
You believe Smith was critizing Lovaas from 1987!!!!!!
Smith is in Lovaas follow-up study in 1993 & his data was completed in 1987 for Lovaas.
He is not critizing him, but then I understand you are oblivious to reality.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Lovaas, O. I., & Smith, T. (1989). A comprehensive behavioral theory of autistic children: Paradigm for research and treatment. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 20, 17-29.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
"Smith proved ... that 13% of people with minimal effort can be indistinguishable his teacher ... showed ... 47% can be indistinguishable."
Do you know why Smith chose 25 hours/week? Was it, you think, because he was a lazy lot unlike Dr Lovaas?
And, once again, the question of intensity was never experimentally addressed by Lovaas. It was addressed recently by Reed (2007). The study by Sallows & Groupner (compare the intensity experimental and the control groups)indirectly suggests the same.
autismvid 3 years ago
I repeat my question: Was your nephew diagnosed with autism?
How did he do in verbal and non-verbal IQ tests before ABA or any other treatment was applied?
autismvid 3 years ago
Yes, yes he was.
Well, I'll give you a hint.
High functioning autism scores high on non-verbal and low on verbal.
Aspergers scores high on verbal and low on non-verbal.
My nephew scored low on both and couldn't talk.
But he has high functioning autism and always was, but they didn't know how to test him.
Koegel, R., & Mentis, M. (1985). Annotation; Motivation in Childhood Autism: Can they or won't they? Jour. of Child Psychol. Psychiat., Vol. 26, No. 2, 185-191.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
"My nephew scored low on both and couldn't talk."
What were the scores? Which IQ tests were used?
autismvid 3 years ago
Ask specifics from his mom, but I believe noncompliance played into scores so what would they prove.
He would be HFA today & "indistinguishable."
Do U know of kid who wasn't talking & by intervention learned 2 talk, but intervention took yrs & became "indistinguishable" slowly over those yrs? I know 6. How many do U know & what was intervention?
If U don't then that explains alot.
U insult intervention in 70s helps children with autism from Lovaas. Pick one from 70s. Name better now.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
"I can lead a donkey to water, but I can't make it drink."
Have you tried the electric shock or slapping?
autismvid 3 years ago
Believe me I'll be reading the Reed article.
The question is whether or not you believe Discrete Trial Training and other proven interventions under the umbrella of ABA help people with autism.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Really, now I could keep replying to all your concerns or you could be a thinking person.
I can lead a donkey to water, but I can't make it drink. I can just use some establishing operations.
I'm done here so just comment ten times so I'm on the second page and then breath a sigh of relief, but you can't ignore science as providing facts.
I will look to Lovaas and the researchers who follow in his footsteps who are respectible.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Ask Lovaas if there R replication sites.
Ask Lovaas if he still does Lovaas method.
Ask Lovaas if anyone receives services from him based from a university & trying 2 replicate his results.
I believe there R over dozen replication sites receiving services & certification from Lovaas.
These places have published in well respected journals.
Have U created world without aversives yet?
If any behavior decreases then answer is "no."
Lovaas gets right behaviors to decrease.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Are you praying after all? :)
autismvid 3 years ago
Does prayer figure in distinguishing interventions that effectively teach?
Look to the realm of science. U can punish behaviors by removing attention. That is an intervention, but non-defining of an intervention that teaches language so 1 who is mute has discerning mind. Lovaas focus 85% on language.
I suppose U have different conditioning. Perhaps an intervention can help.
I suggest cracking open books & journals. Get some sweat to appear on the brow by thinking critically.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Would you finally answer any of the criticisms? Or would you continue praying the ABA-idol?
autismvid 3 years ago
"I believe there R over dozen replication sites receiving services & certification from Lovaas."
Would you finally provide the references to so-called "replication" studies? Or is it a secret? :)
autismvid 3 years ago
Swallows, Smith, and many other professionals have done replications.
Use your brain and find them or look at my references on You-Tube.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Swallows, Smith, and many other professionals WERE UNABLE TO "REPLICATE". Are you sure you actually read the articles or have you just "cracked them open"? ;)
autismvid 3 years ago
Oh, I forgot. Did you "use YOUR brain" when you "read" the articles by Swallows, Smith, and many other professionals? Or have you used brain borrowed from Dr.Lovaas? ;)
autismvid 3 years ago
Victoria Shea (Autism, Vol. 8, No. 4, 349-367 (2004)) analyzed various ABA studies, including the so-called "replications". "Crack it open" and start "thinking critically" (citations follows) ;)
autismvid 3 years ago
"It is time for advocates and professionals to stop citing the figure of 47 percent and the concepts of 'normal functioning', being 'indistinguishable from average children', and having 'recovered' from autism. The reports of the initial research are not consistent with these interpretations; further, over three decades since the research began, other studies have consistently fallen short of the 47 percent figure."
autismvid 3 years ago
I left aerospace engineering and worked with my nephew 50 hr/wk for two years.
"Indistinguishable" means just that for the six (6) kids I know who are just that.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Comment: "the initial research" in the citation means Lovaas (1987)
autismvid 3 years ago
I believe I'm done here.
See you around.
I hope you learn what works if you have a kid with autism who is failing to learn language.
If not I hope my words below help others.
I know it helped many children I worked with and for a handful even "indistinguishability" and I am not even formally trained, but I've read a great deal on the subject.
Hundreds of books and thousands of journal articles.
Enough that I know truth when I read it.
Hope you are a discerner of wisdom.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Have U watched course of life events of someone really affected by autism?
In Ohio since turn of century children R still put in institutions at age of 8 or 9 yrs old.
R U stating that is preferable to an intervention that teaches.
Did U know that 95% of all SIB & aggression is due 2 lack of communication skills?
Try intervention of Lovaas 90% can learn functional language & other 10% learn 2 communicate another way.
Show me facility in 70s having 100% success & I'll show U UCLA.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
I think if 1 watches videos 1 can see idea of intervention & procedures extrapolated towards language & defined in the 1977 book R solid work in teaching language based on operant learning theory.
Procedures R based on how all learn language only so quickly as 2 make obviousness of procedures hard 2 see until looked at with those who learn slower.
U can either determine 2 teach slow learners or chose another intervention not scientific.
your choice; chose 2 teach.
Aversives R optional.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
To hit a leg multiple times and end up with 47% indistinguishable, 68% regular IQ, and 89% functional language.
To not hit and 33% indistinguishable.
Either way Discrete Trial Training has power in its' court.
I'll take Pivotal Response Training myself, but still it is sound and useful intervention and there are no beatings.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Your forgot to mention 13% indistinguishable by Smith, the only randomized controlled study in the history of ABA. And 25 hours/week should be better than 40 hours/week, according to Reed's (2007) study (see above) and yet it is only 13%.
autismvid 3 years ago
Well, Lovaas shows 40hrs/wk better than less.
Many respectible researchers who published who are behaviorists (is Reed a BCBA?) state more hours are better.
The intervention is known as EIBI now because that stands for Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention.
Do you know what Intensive means?
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
"Lovaas shows 40hrs/wk better than less."
Lovaas never showed 40hrs/wk is better than 25 hrs/wk. He never did a comparative study. Other people did and proved him wrong.
"is Reed a BCBA?"
"Use YOUR brain" and find Reed's article. I gave your the reference.
autismvid 3 years ago
Did you know that Carr did functional behavioral assessment in the 70s at UCLA?
Are you so sure that the electroshock study published in a book in 1983 was from that year or mcuh older?
The FBA study was published in 1976 and has the same grant for YAP as Lovaas' 1987 article which made him famous.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
I think in Apple Creek in Ohio in the 60s staff walked around with 2x4 boards in their hands.
This is quite different from a slap to the leg & saying, "No." The resulting intellectual differences are immeasurable.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Please realize for all your high mindedness we are speaking of the past where people thought these children were uneducatable as opposed to sophisticated people who make their own U-tube videos.
The people slapping the child's leg cared about the child & in fact the child avoided future abuse as YAP results are 47% "indistinguishable", 68% regular IQ, & 89% learning functional language.
Meanwhile in institutions across America those beating you love to talk about were really happening.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
In 1970 a non-random intervention made nearly 50% indistinguishable.
You focus on the "non-random" I focus on what matters.
Also, the aversives in the Young Autism Treatment Project should be found out by you before you open your mouth.
The aversives of which you speak are prior to the Young Autism Treatment Project.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Lovaas (2002) writes:
Contingent aversives were employed in the Lovaas (1987) study. Many states now prohibit the use of aversives, and many parents object to such treatment. Either of these factors could prevent replication of the Lovaas (1987) study. However, although the UCLA Young Autism Project no longer uses aversives, we have taken advantage of alternatives to aversives developed during and after the time of the 1987 study was completed.
autismvid 3 years ago
You wrote beating / electroshock.
That is not what happened 1970 to 1984.
First off beatings never happened under Lovaas.
Second off electro-shock was prior to Young Autism Treatment Project.
I stand with my know your stuff before you open your mouth.
So do you know what the contingent aversives are or are you still in the dark?
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
"First off beatings never happened under Lovaas."
"After you hit a child, you can't just get up and leave him; you are hooked to that kid"
O. Ivar Lovaas Interview With Paul Chance
(Psychology Today, 1974)
autismvid 3 years ago
A slap to the leg & saying, "No" is not a beating.
Call me a stickler for defintion, but I agree with the articles saying hitting.
Do you know the difference between being hit & being beat?
Abusive fathers beat children; I work in foster care.
Strict schools from the past hit the back of kids hands with a ruler.
They aren't equal.
Just like quasi-random & random aren't equal. Still on this one it is close enough for the study by Lovaas to be considered scientific and sound.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
"To beat", according to the English dictionary, means "to hit repeatedly". If a child is hit several times within an ABA session, means the child was beaten.
autismvid 3 years ago
Obviously you've never seen the documentation for a foster child.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Obviously I do not have to read this documentation to know the difference between two English words "beating" and "hitting".
autismvid 3 years ago
The discussion deviated into philological exercises. Whether one calls it "beating" or "hitting" is immaterial. The Lovaas (1987) study employed aversives which are no longer
in use. The study therefore cannot be replicated, as admitted by Lovaas himself. Your "double digit articles published on replication of Lovaas" was clearly wrong.
autismvid 3 years ago
You say no such thing as replications of Lovaas' work.
Not really.
The treatment you seem to think is beating.
It is a language program that is defined in a book by Lovaas published in 1977.
If one were to do that intervention then it is a replication.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
It was about the 1987 study. That what we discussed. To do the replication of the 1987 study, one has to follow the protocol closely. This cannot be done, therefore the study was not replicated. Nobody claimed they REPLICATED the Lovaas (1987) study because a number of things not just aversives were done differently.
autismvid 3 years ago
"You wrote beating / electroshock.
That is not what happened 1970 to 1984."
Did you see this one?:
Carr, E. G., & Lovaas, O. I. (1983). Contingent electric shock as a treatment for severe behavior problems In S. Axelrod & J. Apsche (Eds.) . The Effects of Punishment on Human Behavior, (pp. 221-245). New York, Acedemic Press.
autismvid 3 years ago
Is the grant equal to the Young Autism Treatment Project (YAP)?
There are those who think that E. G. Carr did not work under YAP but he did while doing functional behavioral assessment.
Do you know your quoted article is the same grant because perhaps it was with a child not under YAP?
Furthermore, note your quote doesn't cover beatings. Just shock.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
"First off beatings never happened under Lovaas."
"Enraged bellows at the boy, then a sharp slap in the face. This deliberate, calculated harshness is part of an extraordinary new treatment for mentally crippled children."
(Screams, Slaps & Love "A surprising, shocking treatment helps far-gone mental cripples" Life Magazine, 1965). Please also check the photographs. All this happened under Ivar Lovaas.
autismvid 3 years ago
Certainly you are smart enough to know the Chance article was on the original children before the YAP study.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
You wrote "never happened under Lovaas".
How comes the word "never" does not apply to 1965?
autismvid 3 years ago
Lovaas used electoshock in 60s, slap to face in 60s, slap to leg in 70s. None of this is beatings. Documentation of beatings is pretty bad. I know. Children in foster care could tell you what a beating is & I bet they could tell those in 70s cared for children with autism as they have intelligence unlike you.
They would be wow-ed to see children unable to speak as shown in footage now able & desire that for themselves. Adults who care.
Please show me your documented evidence of beatings.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
How harshly should one slap a child into the face and how many times to make it qualify as beating?
autismvid 3 years ago
Have you seen documentation of beatings?
That's how many times and to what level of force in the hits, but then the force was never such to be a beating.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Do you know what force was used by Lovaas or his associates when slapping the child into the face? And how many times was it done repeatedly?
No, I did not see the documentation. That is why I am asking you, who have read it. So my questions again: "How harshly should one slap a child into the face and how many times to make it qualify as beating?"
autismvid 3 years ago
U seem 2 think U have something so let me give U UR own logic back 2 U.
Hitler's father beat him till he was bed ridden 4 a month when still in single digits of yrs.
R U suggesting all parents who spank their children R like Hitler's father?
How often do U have 2 hit a child on buttock until they R bed ridden 4 a month?
Or is question more about how hard & end resultant?
U can read exact detail & replicate the shock. It isn't so bad.
Slap likely the same; keep reading.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
You did not answer my question.
autismvid 3 years ago
"You wrote beating / electroshock.
That is not what happened 1970 to 1984.
First off beatings never happened under Lovaas."
Lovaas (1973) writes: "The procedures employed
to extinguish and suppress pathological
behavior rely HEAVILY on several operations: ... (2) contingent aversive stimulation, for example, a slap or PAINFUL electric shock..."
(Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6, 131-165)
autismvid 3 years ago
Treatment in the Lovaas, 1987, study took place between 1970 and 1984. Source: Lovaas, O.I . (2002) Teaching individuals with developmental delays: Basic intervention techniques. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
autismvid 3 years ago
"You focus on the "non-random" I focus on what matters."
It is not me who thinks that randomized trial matters. This important criterion was developed as a standard by scientific community for the sake of being objective. Nobody would believe a new drug efficacy if its action was not studied in a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized way. The same principle applies to any therapeutic study including ABA.
autismvid 3 years ago
Young Autism Treatment Project was quasi-random.
That means it was pretty darn close to being random without being purely random.
Which do you think matters? random vs. quasi-random or "indistinguishable" or living in a mental institution?
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
If you "use YOUR brain" instead of borrowing one from Dr Lovaas, you may find out some interesting details of the Lovaas (1987) study. Somebody already went into trouble to examine carefully various inconsistencies (citation follows):
autismvid 3 years ago
"Smith et al. (1997) correctly report that all children with ratio IQs of less than 37 were excluded from Lovaas (1987). That is, none of the experimental group children in Lovaas (1987) was in the "severely retarded" range at intake. This is contrary to what is stated in Lovaas (1987), where it is reported that 10 children--the majority--are in this range."
autismvid 3 years ago
I have brain & UR not saying something I don't know relative 2 information about Lovaas & truthful.
Show me other study in world with children all having IQs proving MR & then intervention such that 68% have regular IQ & 47% indistinguishable from society both in various intellectual & various social assessments all tested by outside source pre & post.
U can't because only ABA is scientific & that is why there R replications & 600 scientific articles showing ABA as efficacious.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Gernsbacher states that Smith's replication with 13% recovery is scientifically valid in every aspect, but intervention was 25 hrs a wk.
More intervention better as Lovaas' 1987 & 1993 article just as scientific & though not random in selection was evaluated by Donald M. Baer (founder of ABA) & found random by him. For Lovaas 47% recovered because they got 40 hrs a wk or more.
Replication sites have published & there R now double digit articles published on replication of Lovaas.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
1. "Gernsbacher states that Smith's replication with 13% recovery is scientifically valid ... but intervention was 25 hrs a wk."
Gernsbacher never stated that the ABA therapy has zero efficiency. She rather finds clear inconsistencies between exaggerated claims, such as by Lovaas (1987) with some other ABA studies. The study by Smith is the ONLY EXISTING RANDOMIZED TRIAL study in ABA. The study by Lovaas did not satisfy one important criterion which immediately undermines its strong statement.
autismvid 3 years ago
2. "Lovaas' 1987 & 1993 article just as scientific"
Sorry, but this is nonsense, it cannot be "as scientific". The study has to satisfy ALL CRITERIA of scientific research to be truly scientific.
autismvid 3 years ago
3. "was evaluated by Donald M. Baer (founder of ABA) & found random by him"
The study was not randomized by design. If whoever asserts it is random does not make it random. Please provide the reference to Donald M. Baer's published opinion.
autismvid 3 years ago
4. "More intervention better" & "For Lovaas 47% recovered because they got 40 hrs a wk or more."
There is no experimental evidence that "more intervention (is) better" above 20 hours/wk level: there is no positive correlation found between the total number of ABA hours and the positive outcome. On the contrary, the
study by Reed et al (2007) suggests that too many hours of the ABA therapy (20, 30, 40 hours compared) have rather negative impact. (J Autism Dev Disord (2007) 37:1815--1821).
autismvid 3 years ago
4. "More intervention better" & "For Lovaas 47% recovered because they got 40 hrs a wk or more."
(continued) Reed et al conclude: "within the high-intensity group there was an inverse relationship between the temporal input and the gains." Study by Sallows & Graupner (2005) did not confirm the positive correlation either. Amazingly, the control group, which received fewer hours of therapy and less supervision by the trained ABA therapists outperformed the test group.
autismvid 3 years ago
5. "Replication sites have published & there R now double digit articles published on replication of Lovaas."
"Replication of Lovaas" would mean one test group with 40 hours of ABA of the kind used by the time, including aversives
(beating, electric shock etc), versus the control group receiving 10 hours of some non-specified therapy. There were no replication studies of the Lovaas's (1987)
study, to my knowledge. If you know of such replications, please provide the references.
autismvid 3 years ago
YAP did not employ beatings, electric shock, or slaps to face.
So replication would be 40+ hours of discrete trial training or operant conditioning focused on language 85% or more of the time, started between the age of 2 to 4 yrs old & lasting 2 to 6 years.
There are over 12 replication publications & of like intervention.
Even more replication sites.
ABA has professionals who meet every yr to determine how to best help people with autism by scientific procedures since 1974.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
The 1987 study included aversives. Hitting or beating is of no consequence. The 1987 study included control group, receiving 10 hours of some non-specified therapy. I did not see any new studies of the kind. Please provide the references.
autismvid 3 years ago
You write: "Replication sites have published & there R now double digit articles published on replication of Lovaas."
Lovaas (2002) writes: "Many states now prohibit the use of aversives, and many parents object to such treatment. Either of these factors could prevent replication of the Lovaas (1987)"
There is a clear contradiction.
autismvid 3 years ago
Lovaas clearly states that the aversives are unlikely to be a critical component of the intervention and surely you are aware that discrete trial training is what Lovaas did and what others are doing minus the aversives.
Surely you are aware that would be replication or are you unaware of the difference between ABA and DTT?
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
"Lovaas clearly states that the aversives are unlikely to be a critical component of the intervention"
Lovaas clearly states that his study of 1987 CANNOT BE REPLICATED.
Likely or unlikely aversives played their role can only be answered by a special experimental study.
autismvid 3 years ago
If you wish to understand the value of aversives you would need to do a specific study.
Sure, I'll buy that.
The use of aversives is prohibited and so a replication with aversives might be difficult, but that does not eliminate the possibility of replicating his language intervention which many have done.
Why am I arguing to prove something that is obvious?
Oh, right it's because your being unreasonable.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Until the role of aversives in the 1987 study remains unknown because of the lack of the experimental studies the word "replication" has little meaning. Lovaas understands it, I understand it. You do not seem to understand it.
"replicating his language intervention which many have done."
References, please.
autismvid 3 years ago
ABA is different than other interventions 4 children with autism. While other autism treatments may travel the country & put on a large number of conferences 2 advertise their techniques, ABA has professionals from throughout the world gather on a consistent basis (since 1974) specifically 2 review & advance methods & strategies 4 the benefit of children with autism.
The 600 articles R sound & there R many more articles on ABA techniques reviewing other treatment methods that aren't sound.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
The fact that other therapeutic interventions do not have much scientific standing does not mean ABA is automatically liberated from valid criticisms, some of which I tried to emphasize. ABA is not a religion and it does not need a belief to sustain itself. For its own scientific good and has to be more sensitive to critical arguments than to a praise (which is mostly self-praise).
autismvid 3 years ago
The "600 articles" argument is repetitious and getting worn out. I would suggest to
read Dr. Morton Ann Gernsbacher article ("Is One Style of Early Behavioral Treatment for Autism "Scientifically Proven"? J. Developmental and Learning Disorders, 2003)
autismvid 3 years ago
I read this 1 by Gernsbacher. I will not strain at a gnat 2 figure out if there is something 2 defend. If there is an attack it is so weak as 2 B useless. Kind of like your comment on other interventions.
People who don't attack ABA with strong argument do so because they don't want 2 seem foolish 2 the scientific community.
There is reason 4 that. Go with it.
Maybe science has begun 2 understand human behavior. What I believe is ABA is not a religion, but rather...read my moniker.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Would you prove the "attack" (or whatever) by Gernsbacher is weak? Please do so in a very concrete way. I would like to see concrete contra-arguments, not the evasive and superfluous statements.
autismvid 3 years ago
Gernsbacher article states science and proof is demanded by ABA. Has that article done the same?
Gernsbacher article states 1 article as completely scientific & states that 13% recovery was achieved. What U ignore is that it's statistically significant that only 2% spontaneous recover irregardless of treatment?
Note your article supposedly attacking ABA says ABA causes recovery. Times have changed to still be considered a professional while attacking ABA.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
"Note your article supposedly attacking ABA says ABA causes recovery."
Gernsbacher did not use the word "recovery" in the article. Where did you find it?
autismvid 3 years ago
"Note your article supposedly attacking ABA says ABA causes recovery."
Would you mind pointing out where Gernsbacher used the word "recovery" in her article? The best would be the page and the line numbers.
autismvid 3 years ago
Well, look at the article and see what the 13% is refering to for Smith, what the 47% for Lovaas is referring to (1987, 1993), and what the 33% is referring to in most replications.
You will find it related to "indistinguishable" and so if you wish to fight over words please join the rest of the world the documentation of what was accomplished was not done in a secret corner.
Gernsbacher is aware of the results like you.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
"Note your article supposedly attacking ABA says ABA causes recovery."
Did you "use YOUR brain" when you wrote this sentence? Gernsbacher never wrote such a thing.
autismvid 3 years ago
Another article to read: "Can early interventions alter the course of autism?" by Dr. Patricia Howlin published in the book "Autism: Neural basis and treatment possibilities" (Wiley, 2003) with the appended discussion.
autismvid 3 years ago
Koegel at UCSB talks about Natural Language Paradigm & Pivotal Response Training.
They prove their intervention by single case design with ABA criteria of proving things by reversals, multiple baseline design, & other scientific procedures.
True, Koegels don't have randomized control trial setup, but procedures R scientific.
It is unethical 2 refuse treatment & control groups R hard 2 come by due 2 eclectic treatment options & people seeking out ABA due to its' proven track record.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Autismvid writes, "U should know better than me that out of those 600 articles very few would pass stringent criteria of the scientific research (the randomized control trial setup)."
I would know that ABA requires single case design, multiple baseline, reversals & other scientific procedures & so all of them would pass scientific stringent criteria because that is what ABA is my friend.
Intervention Lovaas did was discrete trial training, but method 4 proving intervention useful is ABA.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Important grant for autism:
Lovaas, O. I., Koegel, R. L., & Schreibman, L. Experimental studies in child schizophrenia (Research Project MH-11440-07). National Institute of Mental Health, 1973.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Here are two good books on autism:
"Generalization and Maintenance: Life-Style Changes in Applied Settings" by Robert Horner, Glen Dunlap, & Robert Koegel
"Educating and Understanding Autistic Children" by Robert Koegel, Arnold Rincover, & Andrew Egel.
Here are two good goods on people:
"Meaningful Differences in the everyday experience of young American children" by Betty Hart & Todd Risley.
"The Social World of Children Learning to Talk" by Betty Hart & Todd Risley.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Thanks for the references.
autismvid 3 years ago
Child learns 2 talk & then learns 2 not talk is like saying, "The apple is ripe because it is red." Glad U understand it.
Some people don't even admit that conditioning is learning. U don't even buy that pre & post synaps in brain R connected by classical & operant conditioning.
Key feature is conditioning 2 remediate autism. I suggest looking 2 behaviorism 4 proven treatment, which U don't deny.
People think & thus conditioning continues with nothing 2 observe.
Autism in genes.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Your statements become too abrupt and disconnected. They are impossible to follow.
If you did not understand what my analogy meant I shall make and effort explain it better. There is one behavioral fact "child regresses" and another behavioral fact that the same child has "stimulus overselectivity". If those happen to be external behavioral properties of the same child does not mean one is the cause of the other.
autismvid 3 years ago
1st quick all answering comment then gave U 4 books 2 understand behaviorism if U wish. Finally, grant 2 show Koegel's work & Lovaas' R similar.
Child has "stimulus overselectivity" so child hears words & vocalizes. Child has "stimulus overselectivity" so conditioning of words is not strengthened. Child is conditioned 2 not talk = regressive autism.
If "stimulus overselectivity" was real strong then no talking at all as child would perceive enriched environment as completely non-enriched.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
CAPD would have to be studied with newborn infants to prove it is the egg and not the chicken so to speak as babies are born with autism.
Same true for stimulus overselectivity.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Some of them might be born with it some of them may develop it with time. The developmental failure by the age of 3 might be pre-programmed by the deleterious mutations in the child's genome. Those might be responsible for the death of the Purkinje cells or mirror neurons in the child's brain. There might be some biomedical means to prevent or stop this process it but they are yet to be discovered.
autismvid 3 years ago
Does this mean that children with autism are conditioned over time to exhibit stimulus overselectivity or that stimulus overselectivity conditions children down a different conditioning path?
If a child with autism exhibits speech they can learn "ba" but be unaware of the salient stimulus required to get a bottle.
Hence, a typical baby can learn to find mother to get the reinforcement, while the child with autism is conditioned to give up on speech.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Central auditory processing disorder means what behaviorally?
Can it be remediated?
Can it be proved to exist from birth or does the individual have to develop to a certain point prior to experimentally showing it by testing?
There are many things you have to prove to convince a community of researchers that it is worth their time to study it further.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
It means that a child cannot distinguish sounds. For example, "ba" and "da" or "ga" may sound all the same. Behaviorally it may mean, for example, that you teach a child colors through ABA, and 3 years later he/she still mixes them up. I am not sure how this relates to "stimulus overselectivity" or if there is any connection at all. I am not even sure how stimuli are counted. In my mind there is always more than one stimulus in any given environment.
autismvid 3 years ago
Then you take the same child (and I mean one very concrete child) after three years of ABA and do BioMAP test which provides an objective measure of the child's inability to distinguish sounds. This is an important piece of information for changing the course of the therapy to the given child (either through Fast Forword) or music lessons to target this concrete defect. My point is one has to look inside and one has to diagnose the problem instead of just doing DTs till blue in the face.
autismvid 3 years ago
Is there any intervention that remediates this CAPD that you speak of and how many people have been shown to exhibit CAPD and is there different types of CAPD in terms of how it is observed to affect individuals in controlled studies with reversals and multiple baseline studies.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Not many children with autism are routinely tested with any objective means, including BioMAP, functional MRI or biochemical tests. The tests are not cheap and most doctors("specialists") are either completely unaware of available tools or they do not believe they are worth the trouble. For most of them labeling child autistic does the trick.
Check this one:
Merzenich et al (1996). Temporal processing deficits of language-learning impaired children ameliorated by training. Science, 271, 77-81.
autismvid 3 years ago
Thank you.
I'm going to read all the articles you post.
That's what I do.
I'm busy now so it might be awhile till I've read them, but rest assured I will read them.
Especially this last one which discusses something being ameliorated.
I look forward to long term studies on the significance of ameliorating it.
Dr. Robert L. Koegel looks to behaviors worth teaching for its' impact on overall functioning. We need professionals like that.
Best regards.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
I like your Merzenich reference. I will quote him now:
"These studies have shown that the ability of an adult animal to make fine distinctions about the temporal or spectral features of complex inputs can be sharply improved, or degraded, by a period of intensive behavioral training."
It is true that any behavior can be strengthened or weakened by intensive behavioral training and indeed if it is intensive enough and early enough there is no regression.
Indistinguishability is possible.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Lovaas, O. I., & Schreibman, L. (1971). Stimulus Overselectivity of Autistic Children in a Two-Stimulus Situation. Behavior Research & Therapy, Vol. 9, 305-310.
Koegel, R. L., & Schreibman, L. (1977). Teaching autistic children to respond to simultaneous multiple cues. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 24, 299-311.
How do you know that the only treatment that can remediate CAPD is ABA at least by proven research?
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
THE MORE
Being scared or looking at others funny is not a way to evaluate something.
He looks funny at those who pull their pants down to their ankles in the bathroom, but that doesn't mean I evaluate that person as he does.
He benefited from ABA and so do so many children who received it.
When you have a scientific study saying otherwise or proving a different therapy.
LET ME KNOW
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
My other problem with the Behavioral Science is that it is completely ignorant of other sciences. One example, many kids labeled autistic (whatever this means) suffer from central auditory processing disorder. The underlying cause for that is that their brain stem does not process sound information correctly. There are objective means (BioMAP test) developed to test brainstem functionality which do not rely on the verbal response from the child and therapies to correct it (Fast ForWord program)
autismvid 3 years ago
I've heard of "Stimulus Overselectivity" which has been shown for decades as accurate.
What articles do you have that prove a central auditory processing disorder and has it stood up to peer review?
What intervention helps this problem and what results and what peer review?
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago