For David, there's a short article attached to this gigantic and unusually enlightening comment board (that Misbehaviour of Behaviourists thing). In it I refer to ASAT's position on stereotypy, as well as to one of the studies ASAT refers to.

Hi Dave,

I have never heard a British person properly define the qualifications of being a "git", but I imagine that Dr. Newman qualifies, as does Dr, Mulick for that matter.

He is indeed a git. Although I have this terrible suspicion that one day when I am a Ph.d, that some smart alec behaviorist undergrad will write about all the ridiculous things I've said or done. Oh well,....

You said "Or if he was receiving any!"

Very true, and I have heard of more than one case like that, as I am sure you have.

Hmmmmm...

[You said “(Personally, I've always been intrigued by the fact that one of the children in Lovaas's Control Group 2 - receiving no behavioural intervention at all - met his criteria for "recovery", whereas none of the children in Control Group 1 - on ten hours a week - did so).”

I do as well. But I am not altogether suprised. Unfortunately, we do not know what other treatments he may have been receiving. ]

Or if he was receiving any!

Hi Michelle...

>Re: stereotypy (David posted the ASAT URL), I refer to that in the attached article.

*Attached article? Which one?

>Here's the autistic who was assigned to stop flapping his hands while alone.

*OUCH!

>I didn't use ASAT's info as a reliable source.

*No, and neither would I!

>It's pretty important with their stuff to look at the original sources.

*Yes. Clare told me how they fuck things about.....

Hi Clare,

You said “Lovaas's 1987 study excluded all children whose tested IQs put them in the "severely or profoundly" retarded category, and eliminated them if they were mute past a certain age (whereas children of the same age who had some speech were included).”

This is true and not disputed; it is the inferences sometimes drawn from this that I don’t like. Of course that study still included children who ranked mildly and moderately retarded. That is not what I would call “high functioning”, as others have proposed.

Correct me if I am wrong but, Rett’s was not in the PPD’s in the DSM-III, which would be what the assessors used in 1987. And remember that those in control group one were provided by other diagnosticians not by the Lovaas folks, who didn’t do their own assessing anyway. You’ll remember that the whole concern over random assignment was dealt with by Lovaas, by stating that his undergrads that acted as “therapists”, had uneven time schedules, and that there was only a partial chance that a student could be around to work with a child 40 hours a week. Hence some kids by time default were placed in control group two. Well, not the standard, flip a coin assignment, but that would provide some variability.

I grant that it seems DT looks like the main dogma to folks on the outside and even to “novice behaviorists”, as I was once called by a professor when I brought up this very point.

You said “as DTT and incidental teaching, it is then very hard to make any generalizations about "ABA" as a whole, let alone claim that "ABA is scientifically proven". You can only discuss specific techniques or procedures.”

Maybe we should not be trying to generalize ABA as a whole. I have no problem discussing ABA, method by method. Although, I see that, would invalidate my “I should have said ABA not DT”, comment from last post. I suppose in the future I will just have to list as many ABA methods with multiple research examples, as I can think of.

You said “(Personally, I've always been intrigued by the fact that one of the children in Lovaas's Control Group 2 - receiving no behavioural intervention at all - met his criteria for "recovery", whereas none of the children in Control Group 1 - on ten hours a week - did so).”

I do as well. But I am not altogether suprised. Unfortunately, we do not know what other treatments he may have been receiving.

You said “Nor can it be generalized to ABA programs run by highly-reputed professional agencies, as the Boyd and Mudford studies showed.”

You see, I tend to split hairs on “experts”, being there, and “experts”, who act as consultants.
On Lovaas’ clams on replication……Well I think we can call some of the studies done by his students, or his students’ students, replications. But I see why he is leery. It would be very generous to call some studies even systematic replications. I do have a slight problem with non behaviorist doing DT for the simple reason that they seem to have very little idea how or why it works.

You said “And it is fraudulent to give parents of autistic children not involved in that handful of specific programs the belief that they have a 33% or 47% (let alone a 50/50) chance of "recovery".”

But we can reference the best results and explain to parents how we replicate Lovaas’ conditions, and maybe explain why there may be differences in our program,. The center I assist in will never reach 40 hours per week, because of inherent frameworks. Parents know this, and seem to embrace our program anyway. If have heard an informal report that we get between 10-30% of the kids into a mainstream class without an aid. Lot of variability and I don’t actually know the efficacy of that. But that is what I’ve heard. It seems more akin to Smith (2000) results. Of course we also get kids with Downs Syndrome and autism and some kids who have autism and some other condition. As well as some kids who I doubt autism is the main condition of interest. And some of our kids only get 15 hours a week. So we don’t have just Autism Disorder kids. Obviously this effects results as well.

You said “Lovaas stated that his within-subjects control procedure showed that without the use of aversives any gains were "small and unstable".”

Okay, but I would like to see more replication on this before I accept it. And since the folks who still use physical aversives are all but gone, we are not like to see that. Also the DT methods of today are different from how they were in 1987. The single subjects designs that are the mainstay of JABA have guided this. Just for a not-so-fun fact, I know that several states in the US still allow for spanking in schools for typically developing schoolchildren. And yes, I oppose that as well. If I remember correctly, spanking was allowed in schools in California for the majority of time Lovaas did his DT work with autistic children. Doesn’t excuse it but it puts it in context.

You said “Indeed. But that does rather suggest that the important factor is the skill of the teacher/therapist, not their methodology.”

Well I wouldn’t have said it like that, but there is no denying that the teacher is crucial.

As far as Mudford and company…..hmmmm….well.. let me think about that a bit.

Hi Amanda,

>"Personally, I'd say that it's silly to try to classify "motivation" as a "behaviour" of any kind, and I think (as my comments on Lynn Kern Koegel probably showed) that they're significantly limited by their attempts to remain "good behaviourists"."

*Yes, I agree with this statement; as Kelly used to say, terms like "motivation" and so on are what we use when we don't want to understand the person.

>I can state pretty unequivocally that this specific person is limited by *something*. She insisted that I sit in a fluorescent-lit room and try to carry on a conversation with two people.

*OMG! No thought for what you were able to cope with?

>She tried to remove my cognitive interpreter from the room.

*Sodding Nora! That is horrible.

>She rejected my explanations whenever I *could* give them -- explanations like "I'm not eating enough, I'm nauseated by these lights, I *cannot* talk to two people at once...

*Ouch.... it is not her place to reject explanations. In this situation, she was actually outdoing the psychanalysts at their game: repeated denial of the client's reality until the client gives in. Nasty stuff.

>She acted as if she knew what my problems were and were not from spending five minutes with me.

*I wish sometimes that we could develop a sort of stupidity index. Anyone wanna help?

>When I started banging my head (from inability to communicate) she simply took me from her autism center to the counseling department where a long talk ensued about whether I should be at university at all.

*Talk about insensitivity. Not very person centred, is she? That is absolutely horrible.

>That was actually my first up-close-and-personal introduction to autism "experts".

*May it serve you well.... ;) I may well be an expert; I hope that I don't end up being judged as she (deservedly) is (in my notsofuckinghumble opinion)!

Hi John,

>Yes, I am afraid that Bobby Newman has a reputation of being a bit of a character (even among behaviorists).


Could we deduce that this guy is, behaviourally speaking, a bit of a git?

I have never read such bollocks from even a psychoanalyst, let alone a behaviourist. And from a PhD, I think I should be able to expect better.

To anyone interested,

There are many reasons DT may be expensive. Legal action is not always part of the equation, but that certainly adds to the cost when it occurs.

I don’t hear of anyone using forty hours a week anymore at the major centers, but I may be wrong about this. But between 15 and 30 hours a week is very common. So if we pay the tutor or teacher or trainer, $10.00 an hour times 30. This adds up rather quick. If you do it 50 weeks a year than you are $15,000 down.

If you add in supervisor costs than this goes up.

Also because of the way health care works in the US, insurance rates also become a factor. In some States the amount of money it takes to insure psychological service providers is very high.

I guess I feel the way this should be dealt with in the US is by holding the local schools responsible. This would be in accordance with provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act; which requires among other things that the child be granted a Free Appropriate Public Education.

It may be very hard on families to shell out $15,000 a year. But if the schools could hire a teacher already experienced in DT, which would not be so unreasonable. Some schools do this already. Now the school would have to pay for a new teacher and a few aides, but they already do this with TEACCH and some other eclectic methods.

For a side note, I have heard TEACCH argued as a behavioral method which it is not, although there is no doubt some aspects where “borrowed”, from ABA. All the same, some schools in the US deny DT services, “because we already have a behavioral method TEACCH”. TEACCH is not seen to be the equal of Lovaas style DT, and many of the same methodological flaws observed in Lovaas’ data can be observed in TEACCH. All the same, I don’t think we will ever see Lovaas more popular in the class, because it requires some creativity to make it fit in the classroom, whereas TEACCH fits more readily in a traditional classroom. All this said, I do not deny the effectiveness of TEACCH, I just put it second to Lovaas.

I agree with Clare in her Big Statement.

"If you give someone (autistic or not) information in a format they can understand and make use of, they will learn. And if interaction is accessible and interesting for them, they will interact."

Though I'll inconveniently add that the content (as well as the format) of this information might enter into it for an autistic.

Re stereotypy (David posted the ASAT URL), I refer to that in the attached article. Here's the autistic who was assigned to stop flapping his hands while alone. I didn't use ASAT's info as a reliable source. It's pretty important with their stuff to look at the original sources.

Edited by author 04-29-2004 06:56 PM
Hi John,

No, that info was about Watson, and I read it in a pretty respectable book about the mind. I can locate that book in my head as to where it is in which library (which is how I remember things) but don't know its title. If I have time I'll go back and find it. Some of Watson's family I think have written about him.

Not sure from the structure of your comment which you think is worse, suicide or becoming a psychoanalyst.

Michelle Dawson
naacanada

"Personally, I'd say that it's silly to try to classify "motivation" as a "behaviour" of any kind, and I think (as my comments on Lynn Kern Koegel probably showed) that they're significantly limited by their attempts to remain "good behaviourists"."

I can state pretty unequivocally that this specific person is limited by *something*. She insisted that I sit in a fluorescent-lit room and try to carry on a conversation with two people. She tried to remove my cognitive interpreter from the room. She rejected my explanations whenever I *could* give them -- explanations like "I'm not eating enough, I'm nauseated by these lights, I *cannot* talk to two people at once..." She acted as if she knew what my problems were and were not from spending five minutes with me. When I started banging my head (from inability to communicate) she simply took me from her autism center to the counseling department where a long talk ensued about whether I should be at university at all.

That was actually my first up-close-and-personal introduction to autism "experts".

Hi Dave,

I replying to your post (210).

Yes, I am afraid that Bobby Newman has a reputation of being a bit of a character (even among behaviorists).

I think I know why he makes those suggestions, but they are a little to far out there for me or even most behaviorists.

Hi Michelle,

On Watson. I have never heard of his sons commiting suicide let alone becoming a psychoanalyst. I did some checking last night but I couldn't find anything on Watson's personal life besides his father being a ne'er do well, and his affair that ended his acdemic carear.

I think you may be mistaking him for Skinner's children. A poplular myth being that Skinner' first daughter become a psycholoanalyst (a la Anna Freud). The myth goes on to say that his second daughter went psychotic and commited suicide in the late 60's. This is intersting considering she came visiting to the international ABA conference a few years ago. Someone should have told her she is supposed to dead or crazy. Last I heard she is still married to the very radical behaviorist and verbal behavior expert Ed Vargas.

Edited by author 04-29-2004 12:20 PM
anyone got anything say on this... ?

http://www.asatonline.org/resources/library/stereotypy.html

or this.... (http://www.autismbc.ca/discus/messages/13/154.html?1066596084)

[Science based autism treatment.

As a parent of a child who is making strides in recovering from the disease of Autism I have chosen to post information about 'science' as it applies to Autism treatment. This has been a subject of controversy that has begun to create unhealthy divisions within our peer group. This attempt at division is harmful to us all.

The following statements in 'quotation' can be found in the Manual "Behavioral Intervention for Young Children with Autism". The chapter is 'Evaluating Claims about Treatments for Autism". This is a very important chapter and any parent pursuing science based treatment for their child would benefit from reading it carefully.

From the Manual;
'It appears that there is a relatively narrow "window of oportunity" for young children for young autistic children during which the most effective treatment - Applied Behavior Anaysis - can mean the difference for many between lifelong severe disability and some aproximation to normal functioning. (Anderson, Avery, DiPietro, Edwards, & Christian, 1987: Fenske, Zalenski, Krantz, & McClannahan, 1985; Harris, Handleman, Gordon, Kristoff, & Fuentes, 1991; Lovaas, 1987; Maurice, 1993; MacEachin, Smith, & Lovaas, 1993; Perry, Cohen, & DeCarlo, 1995; Smith, 1993).'

Also from the Manual;
'Objective, scientific evidence about treatment effectiveness makes up much of the research literature in Applied Behavior Analysis. Many examples relevant to treatments for autism can be found in a number of scientific proffessional journals - Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis; Research in Developmental Disabilities; Behavior Modification; Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders; Journal of Behavioral Education; Education and Treatment of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disorders; Journal of Behavioral Education; Education and Treatment in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities; and the American Journal of Mental Retardation, to name a few.'

The author of this chapter goes into great detail on this subject; Parents of children who are on a Lovaas ABA program and parents of children who are on a program that utilizes Applied Behavior Analysis can both take heart that their childs right to these programs can be justified using the extensive information within this chapter. Please note that the emphasis in this chapter is not to rely on statements made by figures of authority and prominence regarding past 'studies' of treatment effectiveness. The emphasis is on assessing the use of science based measurement and practices employed within the childs program and the objective measures being used to scientifically quantify that cognitive and behavioral gains are being realized as a result of the treatment and how to go about ensuring that those objective measures can withstand scientific scrutiny.

Please also note that throughout this manual the treatment of choice is 'Applied Behavior Analysis'. Also note that this does not exclude Lovaas but instead includes it as long as the practices live up to the definition of the discipline of Applied Behavior Analysis.

In addition I recommend that parents take the time to read the chapter within the manual 'Identifying Qualified Proffessionals in Behavior Analysis'. This chapter answers the most relevant questions parents might have in regard to who is appropriate to provide treatment to autistic children. It identifies 108 essential skills and competencies across 12 content areas. This is very helpful to making informed decisions. The chapter also explains about behavior analyst 'certification' which currently seems to be a misunderstood concept for many in the province of BC. Again I think parents of children who are utilizing Lovaas ABA as well as those utilizing Applied Behavior Analysis will find this chapter comforting and do much to address the desire of a select few to create division and seperate 'camps' of parents.

Parents want nothing more than their childs right for science based and medically necessary treatment for autism to be recognized as is the right to science based medical treatment recognized for all non - autistic children who suffer from illness in our province.

FEATBC has recently stated that ONLY Lovaas ABA should be recognized as scientifically supported. The administration of FEATBC is not qualified to make such statements in the context of 'absolute truth', it is instead their OPINION. As such it is my personal opinion that they act irresponsibly both to their members and parents of autistic children across this province in presenting their opinions as the only truth. It is an undeniable truth that not every child will make great progress utilizing strict Lovaas ABA programming. Many parents utilizing Lovaas ABA also incorporate 'other' programs and instructional arrangements to realize progress where strict Lovaas protocol does not produce exemplary progress. This is usually done with the support of their consultant who should objectively measure to ensure a positive outcome is being attained. This is what Applied Behavior Analysis is really about; objectively measuring for baseline performance in the target behavior, determining an intervention to change or promote a target behavior based on data collected in the baseline and referencing developmental norms, objectively measuring and assessing the effects on the target behavior, and finally using those objective measurements and assessments to continually improve the quality of intervention to achieve desired outcomes. This is what constitutes the 'practice' of science in Autism treatment. The results of any individual scientific study whose scope, design, and practical attributes can never be precisely recreated should not be the end all for choosing an appropriate treatment plan for any child simply because the treatment provider has borrowed the name of the author to help describe the general parameters of their programming ideaology.

It is my sincere hope that parents will utilize science in making informed decisions in choosing a treatment option for their child. It is my hope that science is utilized within every childs program to achieve success. Most of all it is my hope that everyones child makes great strides in recovery from the disease of Autism.

I also hope that in this forum we can have a healthy discussion which is free of mudslinging at parents, and their choices, who do nothing more than endeavour to help their child recover from the symptoms of the disease of Autism based on a scientific approach to treating the disease. ]

By Alex Barclay, on the above mentioned message board.

Bobby Newman, one of dear Ms Dawson's detractors, has said this in a toilet training web page....

"You begin the toilet training program by moving ALL your day's activities into the bathroom."

Of course!!!!! I'll get Heta to move all of the things that Tuula does into our pokey little bathroom, so that we can't even get in there to do our usual crap (LoL, no pun intended... yeah right!), let alone this stuff here!

"Set up a table and chairs in the bathroom, everything you will need to do all the activities of the day (especially discrete trial teaching materials)."

Is this guy out of touch???? In OUR bathroom? We can hardly fit us in there, let alone a bloody table and sodding chairs! And this guy has a PhD in ... ABA, actually.

"Dress your student in undergarments that will easily allow you to see when elimination HAS BEGUN (not occurred!!!)."

Student? This is the parents' CHILD we're talking about - right? Student? Ah... obviously someone's lost touch with reality here, and I know is bloody-well ain't me!

"Give your student all that (s)he will drink. Use highly favored beverages. Use reinforcers to encourage drinking."

But what about if the chi.-oops -STUDENT - doesn't LIKE strongly flavoured drinks. And is it ethical to encourage a child - yes, Dr Newman, I said CHILD - to drink when s/he doesn't want to?

http://www.tclc.com/research/faq5.html

And he dares to have a go at "wor" Michelle? I know nursery teachers with a better knowledge than that man will every have. I do not do Tuula's nappy so I would never profess on the topic of toilet training. Has this guy ever tried to do what he is suggesting? In the home of a small family with a limited income and very limited bathroom space, and almost no available time between trying to get themselves into work .... Newman, you're an arse. STFU!