Talk:Applied behavior analysis

Stigmatizing wording, and downplaying the absurdity of trying to "cure" or even "treat" Autism.

This article needs a complete rewrite, best done by ACTUALLY AUTISTIC PEOPLE for the love of god. Right now I'm really mad and frustrated, but I'll come back to this when I have the energy, for now, this should suffice. We will never be cured, because we were never sick in the first place. Love to fellow neurodoverse ppl and actual allies❤️♾️ Au (talk) 17:20, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

I would actually try to contact the moderators to block edits from unregistered users on this article. Seems like opinionated random(?) people off the internet. Gamma1138 (talk) 16:57, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

ABA is not just used with people on the spectrum. Joyandcaring (talk) 16:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

ABA practitioners often claim expertise regarding a number of complex neurotypes (including the autistic and ADHD neurotypes) and complex conditions (including PTSD and depression). Perhaps you could explain how this could possibly be so when not even those with a doctorate focusing on ABA have to take a single course examining such neurotypes and conditions from a neurological or otherwise medical perspective and certainly don't have to learn anything about neurodivergent (including Autistic or ADHD) history or culture. BTW, if you had such cultural training, you would know that the majority of the Autistic population prefers the label "Autistic" to euphemisms, like "on the spectrum." DoItFastDoItUrgent (talk) 18:15, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

It needs to be reviewed and rewritten by someone with experience in this area, like a psychiatrist, pediatrician, etc. who doesn't have a conflict of interest in this area like all the study authors related to this do.

Autism spectrum disorder as listed in the DSM can be treated to reduce challenges autistic people may face in their life, such as in cases of being non-verbal, self-harming, etc. Someone not liking how an autistic person communicates isn't a medical issue that needs treatment and any psychiatrist that isn't being paid to sell a miracle cure will tell you that. 134.215.176.89 (talk) 21:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

ABA was never designed to cure anyone from autism. It's the application of the science of behavior analysis to understand the function of behavior and differentially reinforce new behaviors or skills. In the context of autism, Lovaas (the founder of discrete trial teaching and early intensive behavior intervention for autism) was the first to point out that ABA does not change anything on the physiological level. And ABA is an evidence-based practice for a number of conditions, including—but not limited to—autism. ATC ^{. Talk} 00:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

This is a disgrace for Wikipedia

I've seen a lot of crap on Wikipedia, but this article looks nothing like a Wikipedia page. What gets me is the manner in which it's written. It's like a promotional material that one can read on shady blog-sites. "There is a growing body of literature regarding the proficient implementation of and adherence". Just have a look at the CBT page. That's how a proper article on psychology is written. Since when does Wikipedia publish opinions on what's "a growing body of [...] the proficient". Gamma1138 (talk) 16:45, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Genuinely bizarre. It seems as if some of the editors have a weird vested interest in promoting it 97.118.124.225 (talk) 22:33, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

They also want to remove the "controversies and criticism" section that a lot of articles have but becomes a big problem when this article and Autism Speaks has it to cover its controversies and criticisms, like the controversies and criticisms related to it being used to abuse children. 134.215.176.89 (talk) 20:45, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

It does appear unusual that some major controversies (such as the U.S. Department of Defense's OIG finding that ABA does not meet the agency's standards of proof of efficacy for medical reimbursement) are not explicitly mentioned in this article. Often, the excuse for barring such information is that not enough scholarly secondary sources have referenced the controversy. Meanwhile, ABA industry journals (many of which are ad-supported and routinely allow authors to avoid disclosing conflicts of interest) are considered scholarly sources worthy of citation. It's this veneer of credibility (and the general societal view of Autistic people as eternal children at best and subhuman at worst) that allows ABA practitioners to pass off a cruel pseudoscience designed to take advantage of panicked and desperate parents as supportive at best and "controversial" at worst. The claim that "reforms" have been implemented backed by only a single journal article written primarily by ABA practitioners (citation 24) is especially dubious, and the false "both sides" neutrality running throughout the article is insulting to survivors of ABA (and to the Autistic community more largely). DoItFastDoItUrgent (talk) 19:09, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@DoItFastDoItUrgent Extremely anecdotal, but I swear it wasn't this bad a year ago(??). In any case, atm this article severely underrepresents and trivializes the Autistic advocacy movement and its criticism of ABA... and barely references the actual (current) concerns of ASAN/etc., which are extremely well-worded (and importantly, formalized) in ASAN's white paper. Although I know there are neurodiversity-affirming and anti-ABA formal "scholarly" papers, I honestly argue that the extent of the socio-cultural movement against ABA itself, alongside the known and referenced methodological and bias issues within the field, warrant a top-level "Critisms" section. Unburnable (talk) 00:41, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Practitioners vs. Lecturers in the field

I saw that my edit was changed because there was no indication that the authors were practitioners, which is fair enough, that was poorly phrased on my part. However, the authors of the cited blog post do refer to behavior analysis as "our field" in post, so they're also not observers from outside the field. I think it's important to indicate who the criticism was made by, just as the preceding sentence indicated that the comparison was advanced by a "social worker and researcher", because otherwise the phrasing seems to imply that the criticism of that comparison came from parties with no stakes in the conversation - which is untrue. It's from a blog post by behavior analysts. Would "lecturers in the field of behavior analysis" be acceptable? 173.230.161.116 (talk) 01:52, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Good catch on the ambiguous wording of the original passage, and thank you for going back in and making the eventual "lecturer" change, despite the reverter's non-response. Although there will be always be false neutrality in this article (e.g., portraying the opinions of ABA industry insiders as equally valid as those of ABA survivors and other critics), at least we can point out the bias of industry-written sources so the casual reader doesn't mistake industry propaganda for broader consensus. To be quite frank, sources like the one in question (a blog entry written by ABA lecturers that includes a self-citation) shouldn't be cited on Wikipedia to begin with. Any RBT or BCBA can write up a blog post feigning horror at the thought of an ABA practitioner ever doing anything unethical. It doesn't make their opinion noteworthy. DoItFastDoItUrgent (talk) 21:31, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Add Use in Public Schools

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) of 2004 states that when a child whose behavior interferes with the child's learning or the learning of others the IEP (Individual Educational Plan) Team consider the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports. Typically a Functional Behavior Analysis (FBA) is conducted which results in a Behavior Improvement Plan (BIP). There is a lot more to it but this is a basic introduction to the idea that elements of Applied Behavior Analysis are routinely used in public schools and is governed by federal law. Joyandcaring (talk) 16:52, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Removal of Promotional Talking Point

I propose deleting the (grammatically incorrect and improperly punctuated) sentence in the History section that reads, "Lovaas' work went on to be recognized by the US Surgeon General in 1999, and his research were replicated in university and private settings."

Frequently, ABA practitioners will claim that the U.S. Surgeon General has "endorsed" or "recommends" ABA. Even this more neutral "recognized" wording distorts the facts.

Specifically, former U.S. Surgeon General David Satcher included a single paragraph in a 1999 report hundreds of pages long regarding the topic of "mental health," which praised Lovaas and his research. The paragraph in Satcher's report was written in a clearly promotional style and contained no substantive discussion or analysis.

The U.S. Surgeon General has never publicly mentioned ABA while in office before or since, and their office does not currently maintain any official guidance regarding its efficacy, ethics or implementation.

The fact that those practicing, teaching or studying ABA frequently bring up this talking point (including in the cited journal articles) does not make it any less misleading or promotional (or any more noteworthy). DoItFastDoItUrgent (talk) 02:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

ABA is an evidence based practice and the research shows there is different learning styles

Also, ABA is not a therapy only used for autism (it's the application of the science of behavior analysis to change behavior and to understand its' function and causes), and the verbal and physical aversives are currently outdated as well. There is also a lot of misinformation about ABA in this article.

Please take a look at these sources:

Bringell, A., Chenausky, K. V., Song, H., Zhu, J., Suo, C., & Morgan, A. T. (2018). Communication interventions for autism spectrum disorder in minimally verbal children. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 11(11).

Dillenburger, K., & Keenan, M. (2009). None of the As in ABA stand for autism: Dispelling the myths. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, (1), 1-3.

Dimian, A. F., Symons, F. J., & Wolff, J. J. (2021). Delay to early intensive behavioral intervention and educational outcomes for a Medicaid-enrolled cohort of children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 51(4), 1054–1066.

Jobin, A. (2020). Varied treatment response in young children with autism: A relative comparison of structured and naturalistic behavioral interventions. Autism, 24(2), 338-351.

Kasari, C., Shire, S. Shih, W., Landa, R., Levato, L., & Smith, T. (2023). Spoken language outcomes in limited language preschoolers with autism and global developmental delay: RCT of early intervention approaches. Autism Research, 16(6), 1236-1246.

Keenan, M., & Dillenburger, K. (2011). When all you have is a hammer …: RCTs and hegemony in science. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 5(1), 1–13.

Langh, U., Perry, A., Eikeseth, S., & Bolte, S. (2021). Quality of early intensive behavioral intervention as a predictor of children's outcome. Behavior Modification, 45(6), 911-928.

Myers, S. M., & Plauché Johnson, C. (2007). Management of children with autism spectrum disorders. Pediatrics, 120, 1162-1182.

Paul, R., Campbell, D., Gilbert, K., & Tsiouri, I. (2013). Comparing spoken language treatments for minimally verbal preschoolers with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43(2), 418-431.

Roane, H., Ringdahl, J., & Falcomata, T. Clinical and organizational applications of applied behavior analysis (Practical resources for the mental health professional). Weltham, MA: Academic Press/Elsevier, 2015.

Smith, T., & Iadarola, S. (2015). Evidence base update for autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 44(6), 897-922. ATC ^{. Talk} 22:39, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

If you are genuinely soliciting consensus on a proposed change, you should point out what specific information is in need of correction. Your mention of the presence of misinformation is too vague to act on.

Additionally, I have reverted your last two edits for the reasons stated in the edit summaries.

Please do not make edits that are identical or substantially similar to edits you or anyone else proposed in the dispute resolution closed on March 1, 2023 without first gaining consensus on the article talk page. DoItFastDoItUrgent (talk) 04:01, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Some of those sources you added back go against WP:POV and WP:SOURCES. Newsources, such as Fortune, are implying a point of view and, in general, Fortune isn't a valid resource for Wiki standards. ATC ^{. Talk} 22:08, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Please be more specific than "some." Regarding the Fortune article, the guidance on sources you cited states the following.

"Editors may also use material from reliable non-academic sources, particularly if it appears in respected mainstream publications. Other reliable sources include:

University-level textbooks

Books published by respected publishing houses

Mainstream (non-fringe) magazines, including specialty ones

Reputable newspapers"

Fortune has not been flagged by the Wikipedia community as a deprecated news source and can certainly be classified as a mainstream magazine. If you have a specific criticism of the news article, itself, which you feel justifies its removal, please bring up that specific criticism.

Also, citing a source that includes criticism of ABA does not, in and of itself, violate Wikipedia standards regarding injecting POV into an article. If it did, no Wikipedia article could include any mention of controversy or debate regarding any topic. DoItFastDoItUrgent (talk) 03:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

It appears you've once again deleted the Fortune citation without cause (merely stating a source is biased without documenting why is not cause) or talk-page consensus and you still don't appear to comprehend the definition of "controversial" (or are deliberately warping its meaning to question ABA critics' perceptions). If, rather than discuss why you believe these changes were justified, you'd prefer to take this to a formal dispute, that's fine with me. DoItFastDoItUrgent (talk) 06:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Please stop deleting the Fortune citation and rephrasing the sentence about ABA being controversial (to make it sound like its status as a controversial subject is a matter of opinion) without talk-page consensus. MidnightAlarm (talk) 21:13, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Also Lovaas is not the founder of ABA, which this article keeps talking about. He developed discrete trial training and early intensive behavior intervention for autism. Skinner is its original founder, as are Baer, Wolf, and Risley. ATC ^{. Talk} 02:44, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

The claim that Ivar Lovaas was not the originator of ABA seems to be an increasingly common talking point within the industry, but it is no more than that - a talking point. While Lovaas' work was heavily based on Skinner's previous attempts to manipulate the behavior of rats, pigeons and other animals using the principles of radical behaviorism, Skinner did not invent ABA. Trying to claim that other early ABA practitioners are more responsible for the creation of the industry than Lovaas was rings equally hollow. While ABA practitioners may find it inconvenient to defend or wave away Lovaas' dehumanization and abuse of both the Autistic and LGBTQIA2S+ communities, that inconvenience does not change the fact that Lovaas was the father of ABA. DoItFastDoItUrgent (talk) 03:33, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Lovaas was one founding father of ABA when applied to autism (he really developed Discrete Trial Training and Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention). Skinner developed Behavior Analysis, and ABA is the application of this science outside the laboratory to a variety of situations (i.e., applied animal behavior, contingency management of substance abuse, organizational behavior management, acceptance and commitment therapy (which uses mindfulness in clinical counseling or to promote diet and exercise), habit reversal training for tics, schoolwide positive behavior support, classroom instruction for typically developing students, pediatric feeding therapy, contact desensitization for phobias, etc.). The main founders of ABA were Baer, Wolf, and Risley (Lovaas' college professors) who founded the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis at the University of Kansas in 1968. Therefore, it is most accurate to say Baer, Wolf, and Risley developed ABA. To add, some of the verbal and physical aversives Lovaas used at UCLA in the 1960s are currently outdated and it's currently against the Behavior Analyst Certification Board's guidelines to use ABA in the form of gay conversion therapy. ABA is an evidence-based practice, there is different learning styles as to which form of ABA kids with autism acquire language from, and when it comes to DTT/EIBI and clinical interventions in general, RCTs are not the only valid form of research designs. You need to design the study differently to show different variables. Your view that ABA does not teach them useful skills is POV and a number of studies (based on valid data collection) for over 50 years suggest otherwise. 02:47, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

You're also using a news source to suggest a view point. This Conchrane review reflecting the 2014 study on the different learning styles that kids with autism respond to here: Bringell, A., Chenausky, K. V., Song, H., Zhu, J., Suo, C., & Morgan, A. T. (2018). Communication interventions for autism spectrum disorder in minimally verbal children. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 11(11). As well as: Kasari, C., Shire, S. Shih, W., Landa, R., Levato, L., & Smith, T. (2023). Spoken language outcomes in limited language preschoolers with autism and global developmental delay: RCT of early intervention approaches. Autism Research, 16(6), 1236-1246. As examples, are much more credible and valid than Fortune. ATC ^{. Talk} 03:16, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: ANTH 193 - Behavioral Science in Practice

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 January 2024 and 13 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ZhengQiTan, AndrewOseguera (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Dkhora (talk) 20:13, 26 February 2024 (UTC)