Newsletter
Volume 30 | 2007 | Number 3
What ABA Is and Isn't: Points Taken from the Last 18 Years of Court Testimony and CSE/CPSE Meetings
By Dr. Bobby Newman, Room to Grow
Over my career, I have taken part in several court cases, and countless meetings of Special Education Committees. These discussions generally considered the appropriateness of applied behavior analysis (ABA) for students diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorders (ASDs). While public knowledge regarding ABA has increased in recent years, the same decades-old myths are often repeated at these meetings, with inaccurate information being used to guide decisions.
The most basic misunderstanding regarding ABA concerns its nature as a science (Chiesa, 2005). ABA is not a “therapy for autism,” it is a science with a data-based decision-making framework that is self-correcting and supported by extensive research. That is not how ABA is presented, however. ABA is presented as just another therapy among the dozens, with nothing in particular to distinguish it. Parents are not informed that ABA is the only treatment methodology that has been empirically verified as effective for helping those diagnosed with ASDs (New York State Department of Health, Early Intervention Program, 1999) or that a vast empirical literature exists that supports the application of this science for teaching skills to people diagnosed with ASDs, promoting independent living and autonomy (www.asatonline.org). Parents are often dissuaded from ABA, for reasons described below.
ABA is often presented as though it were part of an eclectic treatment approach. This gives rise to questions such as “how many hours of ABA is he getting?” ABA is an “around the clock” discipline. Would you have a treatment plan in place for self-injury in school and not at home, or vice versa? Would you intensively teach requesting while in program and then not generalize to breakfast choices? Speaking of eclecticism, Howard, Sparkman, Cohen, Green & Stanislaw (2005) have provided the empirical data. ABA was demonstrated to be more effective than eclectic interventions.
Another misconception is that ABA is discrete trial teaching (DTT). While DTT is a very powerful and widely-used technique, it is hardly the sum total of ABA. If it were, textbooks would not describe technique and research in shaping, chaining, prompting, fading, various differential reinforcement procedures, in vivo and video modeling, scripting, activity schedules, incidental teaching, a variety of behavior management strategies, and dozens of other procedures. This shows the misunderstanding of the nature of ABA. Ironically, sometimes the teaching aspect of ABA is lost. ABA is presented as only managing inappropriate behavior. One hears that “he’s having a behavior,” so the behavior analyst is called. Only inappropriate behavior is considered behavior. Technically incorrect applications of technique are then often provided. Exclusionary time-out with avoidance behavior, for example, is likely to exacerbate the difficulty. This leads to statements like “He doesn’t respond to ABA or reinforcement.”
The mistaken belief that ABA relies on punishers is also frequently mentioned. One administrator cited a Web page that mentioned two studies presented at the ABA International convention, out of thousands of presentations, as evidence that ABA was based upon aversives. What is unappreciated is that the Least Restrictive Treatment Model is an ethical stance endorsed by the B.A.C.B. (see Bailey & Burch, 2005, as well as earlier discussions, e.g., Sidman, 1989).
ABA is often regarded as appropriate only for teaching simple skills. Examining the literature, we observe that ABA effectively teaches even the most complex human behavior. It has been 50 years since Verbal Behavior was published. Research regarding rule-governed behavior goes back decades. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior journal debuted in 1982. We could cite thousands of research projects describing the teaching of complex language and social skills beyond these few examples.
Behavior analysts are often portrayed as refusing to interact with other professionals. Yet, the Special Interest Group listing of ABA International reveals gerontologists, speech therapists, personal trainers, organizational and clinical psychologists, sex therapists, teachers, and a variety of other professionals. It is a basic ethical principle that behavior analysts work in concert with other professionals and parents. Behavior analysts advocate for data-based and thus self-correcting systems, but that is hardly refusing to work with others. ABA has an extensive literature regarding how to teach. Working with other professionals often helps to know what to teach, and with the proper mechanics.
ABA is often portrayed as a stagnant discipline. This statement could only be made by someone who has not kept abreast of the field. Many techniques that were not widely used until comparatively recently (e.g., activity schedules, scripting, video modeling, stimulus equivalence, fluency-based procedures, direct instruction, self-management training) have been empirically validated and are now widely implemented.
Questions are raised regarding ABA research, due to the use of single-subject designs. This stems from a misunderstanding of the problems under consideration, and how we can generalize findings. Could one determine what was causing self-injury for a given individual using a large between-groups design? Such designs could never answer the questions that concern behavior analysts. The findings of a given experiment are not what we seek to generalize, but rather the methodology employed. We can apply the methodology of functional analysis to future behavioral difficulties, for example, even if conditions dictate that we manipulate other variables.
Finally, charges that ABA is manipulative or reduces individual autonomy are heard. This issue of manipulation is impractical, if not downright silly. The final goals of any treatment plan are generalization and maintenance of skills. This would be impossible if treatment plans were not known to everyone concerned, including the individual being taught. Self-management training is a desirable final step of programming. How better to ensure generalization and maintenance? As regards ABA undermining individual autonomy, this is the stuff of science fiction and poor philosophy. ABA is the key to autonomy for many individuals who lack skills. If I lack a skill, I lack choice. I cannot engage in the behavior; I don’t know how. Once taught the skill, however, I have a choice. From over 35 years ago:
MacCorquodale (1971): Once the variables that affect behavior are firmly identified in scientific laws, man is free to alter his fate…by manipulating the variables that are already affecting his behavior for better or worse... Behaviorism is not really a bleak conspiracy to delimit man’s choices and freedom by artificial constraint, any more than physics is a conspiracy against atoms (p. 12).
Skinner (1971): The behaviorists I know…are gentle people, deeply concerned with the problems facing us in the world today, who see a chance to bring the methods of science to bear on these problems…behaviorism is humanism. It has the distinction of being effective humanism (p. 35).
That these misconceptions continue to exist decades later should indicate to behavior analysts that our behavior has to change if we are to win “the hearts and minds” of the public. ABA doesn’t offer a magic pill or shot, often only years of extremely hard effort. Given this, I suggest that the wrong people have been doing the advocating. Consumers must be the true advocates for ABA. A professional can always be dismissed as operating from selfish motives. The consumer is the more convincing advocate. Let me Hear Your Voice was inarguably the most important publication in the history of public recognition of ABA. The most useless I have ever personally felt was following Jennica to the podium, after she showed data and video from a successful behavioral intervention addressing serious behavioral difficulties with her son. I began my talk thusly: “Anyone want a sandwich? I’ve got nothing here.” If I may share an interaction from England in 2001:
Parent to Bobby: “When we formed this group, we agreed that we wouldn’t…try to get the other parents to do the same type of treatment we were doing. My husband and I silently plotted to break the rules and convince the other parents to abandon ABA… Then we heard you speak and saw you working with the kids. Had we seen that first, we would have gone with ABA.”
Bobby to Parent: “That’s the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me.”
We are in a difficult, but not insurmountable, position. ABA is a science that has created very powerful procedures for increasing autonomy by teaching skills and replacing maladaptive behaviors. Many misconceptions regarding its very nature are widely held. While behavior analysts must correct these misconceptions, alone they never can win the overall campaign. The consumer-professional partnership is the way we must proceed.
References
Bailey, J. S., & Burch, M. R. (2005). Ethics for behavior analysts: A practical guide to the behavior analyst certification board guidelines for responsible conduct. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Chiesa, M. (2005). ABA is not a therapy for autism. In M. Keenan, M. Hendersron, K. P. Kerr, & K. Dillenberger. (Eds). Applied behaviour analysis and autism: Building a future together. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Howard, J. S., Sparkman, C. R., Cohen, H. G., Green, G., & Stanislaw, H. (2005). A comparison of intensive behavior analytic and eclectic treatments for young children with autism [Electronic version]. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 26, 359-383.
MacCorquodale, K. (1971). Behaviorism is a humanism. The Humanist, 31(2), 11-12.
Maurice, C. (1993). Let me hear your voice. New York: Knopf.
Sidman, M. (1989). Coercion and its fallout. Sarasota, FL: Authors Cooperative.