Talk:Applied behavior analysis/Archive 1

message: To anon editor responsible for these edits, please read WP:TALK before making further, similar changes.  It is important that you do not edit others comments.  This will allow future users to follow the discussion more easily.
Thanks,
WLU 18:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:TALK]]

message: "The State of Florida, where ABA is widely used" - this statement is not supported. "ABA", or teaching based on behavior analytic principles, is used in many parts of the USA and the rest of the world. It may be more prevalent close to universities where ABA is taught. Rsaffran 18:23, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of ABA 

message: I removed the following section:
* Accounts from previous subjects - Autistic adults who, as children, were subjected to ABA as a means of normalizing them have spoken out concerning their experiences. They describe their treatment as abusive and many are now suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. This has become a major issue within the Autism rights movement. Everything I Needed to Know about Life I Learned from my Behavioral Therapist
This will require a far better reference than the attached one.  It does not meet WP:RS.  Particularly note this section of the RS page.  PTSD is a pretty big thing to throw around about the only validated treatment for autism, and ABA has changed since its inception - punishment is now a much smaller part of practice.  WLU 13:54, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The PTSD of former Lovaas victims is well documented, however I do intend to add better sources, including from the blog of former victim Jerod Poore. Additionally if you go around calling ABA a "validated" "treatment" for autism you can't expect anyone to take you seriously, because you don't deserve to be. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ensrifraff (talk • contribs) 09:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

text: In this case a blog is most definitely a reliable source as it is a firsthand account from someone who was subjected to the tortures of ABA. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ensrifraff (talk • contribs) 17:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

text: You are hardly one to lecture others about the use of NPOV. Your continued assertations that ABA is the "only validated treatment" for autism, or is even validated, could easily be refuted by anyone with the slightest knowledge of autism. The fact that Lovaas used a cherry-picked group to begin with, and the fact that his results could not be replicated, immediately cast doubt upon his claims. Secondly there is the question of your insistence that the Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis is evidence of its usefulness because it is a peer-reviewed journal is inherently irrational, because the aforementioned is written and maintained by practitioners and supporters of ABA, and its articles reviewed by the same. You could, likewise, use the publications of the Eugenics Records Office, also reviewed by practitioners of the same, as evidence in favor of eugenics. Either stand down in your objection to the use of a previous subject's blog or stand down in your defense of JABA; logic demands no less. Thirdly, you have repeatedly shown hostility to anyone who is skeptical of ABA, to the extent that it is implausible to suggest that you do not have a strong personal agenda in favor of ABA, unbefitting an administrator. I formally move that mediation be requested on this matter, as the question of your impartiality, or rather lack thereof, has been entirely settled.--Ensrifraff 08:28, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Paragraph from main article

message: I’d like to say three things.  First, I think the ABLLS is a very valuable assessment tool and I have used it numerous times, however, it’s placement as the second paragraph on a page about Applied Behavior Analysis is inappropriate.  It is designed to help guide goals and program development for successful inclusion into Kindergarten, and as such has limited utility in the field as a whole. 75.6.129.103 07:27, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was an ABA therapist for almost 2 years, we used the ABBLS exclusively to determine what teaching programs to use and to establish long-term progress.  I know there's other instruments used, and they could definitely be added to the page, but the ABLLS is used pretty extensively. WLU 00:12, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think the point is that ABLLS is a part of "applied practice" (and a part of that chunk) and not "all of ABA (theoretical, experimental & applied), which encompasses a lot of work in dozens of areas". Thus, ABLLS, which is used extensively in one particular area (applied settings with autism) is not a reasonable starting point for /the field as a whole/...? --florkle 05:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I re-read the section and I think I see your point better.  I moved the ABLLS to a different part of the page.  Incidentally, I also put in citation templates instead of the citations that were there, but it's a huge pain in the ass so I didn't do the entire page.  WLU 18:26, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't know what citation templates are (yet!) ... :-(  --florkle 18:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Ask (or imply) and ye shall receive Wikipedia:Citation templates.  If you're interested in speeding up your learning curve, you might want to consider adoption.  And here's a blatant plug for popups, they rule.  WLU 20:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ABLLS 

message: Second, your shaping example is an example of physical prompting – not shaping.  A better example would be one that you could take time in teaching (not one that might get the child’s hand bitten if not stopped) since pure shaping can be a time intensive process.  If you would like to maintain the tooth brushing example, a better shaping scenario would be, “A child puts a toothbrush in his mouth, but does not know how to brush (i.e. how to hold or manipulate the handle of the toothbrush so that the brush part makes contact with the teeth in an up and down pattern).  At first, for any way a child moves the brush in the mouth, he is praised (or reinforced in some other way such as with tokens that may be exchanged at a later point for a toy or an activity).  Once the child consistently moves the toothbrush around the mouth, reinforcement for this step is faded, and a more sophisticated approximation of the final goal is reinforced, perhaps any movement in which any part of the head of the brush touches a tooth.  Perhaps the next few steps would be reinforcing any time the brush touches a tooth, when the brush moves in contact with a tooth, and when the brush moves up or down in contact with a tooth, and so on until the final goal is reached.” --75.6.129.103 07:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, I'll change it.  WLU 00:12, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shaping 

message: added links to SKinner, operant conditing, jack michael. changed link from behaviorism (which is a weak page in understanding radical behaviorism) to Radical behaviorism which is better for understanding /this/ branch of philosophy/science.
:Note that if the link is already on the page somewhere, it should not be in the see also section, and if possible the see also links should be embedded in the main text.  I'll try to do so.  WLU 00:12, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  okidokey --florkle 05:39, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  changes 

message: I removed the following paragraph, since it's not a good thing to pop up a disputed section with fact tags when another user has removed it.  How's 'bout we try to find some references and edit the paragraph here, before putting it on the page? WLU 20:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed a few of the objections ("robotic" etc) which went unnoticed. My mistake. As for citations I was going to cite from JEAB/JABA on the articles I'd come across using aversive/punishment measures (I believe for example Lovaas used some in his initial research.) As for "current state of the field" I wasn't sure what to use, although I have Alberto & Thomas ABA For the Classroom which documents the use of aversive practices in that setting to some extent and ethical measures relating to it. But I am ok with developing here, sure. --florkle 00:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh yeah, Matt Israel has an aversives piece on his webpage (unfortunately, as I am opposed to the use of aversive control and I don't find his defense plausible). --florkle 00:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Well the use of aversives is controversial. I don't think many people actually defend it, per se. I attended his (Israel's) presentation at the last ABA (San Diego) and he presented data "like a multiple baseline" except that it had some obvious problems - for instance at least two of his graphs showed a trend in the lowering direction which the aversive 'treatment' lowered. It might have been more than two, but the slides weren't up very long. Moreover, he mentioned how some students ask to be placed on the aversives program as they seem to have more access to reinforcers. This suggests that the "positives only" is a lesser program of positives (i.e. the aversives are aversives "plus more positives"). He said, in response to an audience question, that it took from 11-12 months before students were placed on aversives, but one testimonial (he played a video with testimonials in it) said he went on aversives after only one week (!). So I don't think that this issue has many "non-controverial" proponents?
--florkle 20:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

text: JEAB/JABA and perhaps some TAVB articles (only hard copy) which might show the lack of aversives in research. --florkle 00:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I added 2 source citations. I am having trouble finding the California law that refers to the ethical/legal use of aversive stimulation, but I am looking for it. --florkle 22:33, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aversives 

message: *
* (not very reliable)
* ditto
* shows old-school
* ditto 2 & 3
Unfortunately there's nothing I could find with a quick google scholar search, but we might be able to dig something up.  WLU 20:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed a few of the objections ("robotic" etc) which went unnoticed. My mistake. As for citations I was going to cite from JEAB/JABA on the articles I'd come across using aversive/punishment measures (I believe for example Lovaas used some in his initial research.) As for "current state of the field" I wasn't sure what to use, although I have Alberto & Thomas ABA For the Classroom which documents the use of aversive practices in that setting to some extent and ethical measures relating to it. But I am ok with developing here, sure. --florkle 00:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh yeah, Matt Israel has an aversives piece on his webpage (unfortunately, as I am opposed to the use of aversive control and I don't find his defense plausible). --florkle 00:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Well the use of aversives is controversial. I don't think many people actually defend it, per se. I attended his (Israel's) presentation at the last ABA (San Diego) and he presented data "like a multiple baseline" except that it had some obvious problems - for instance at least two of his graphs showed a trend in the lowering direction which the aversive 'treatment' lowered. It might have been more than two, but the slides weren't up very long. Moreover, he mentioned how some students ask to be placed on the aversives program as they seem to have more access to reinforcers. This suggests that the "positives only" is a lesser program of positives (i.e. the aversives are aversives "plus more positives"). He said, in response to an audience question, that it took from 11-12 months before students were placed on aversives, but one testimonial (he played a video with testimonials in it) said he went on aversives after only one week (!). So I don't think that this issue has many "non-controverial" proponents?
--florkle 20:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

text: JEAB/JABA and perhaps some TAVB articles (only hard copy) which might show the lack of aversives in research. --florkle 00:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I added 2 source citations. I am having trouble finding the California law that refers to the ethical/legal use of aversive stimulation, but I am looking for it. --florkle 22:33, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Some possible references

message: I've moved the mediation tag to the talk page where it's supposed to go.  See the last line of this page. --WLU 21:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am taking a break for a bit, but I am sure all will be well in the meanwhile. --florkle 21:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mediation

message: Here's my criticisms of the info in the criticisms section.
:In the case of Auton (Guardian ad litem of) v. British Columbia (Attorney general), the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that since the outcomes of ABA were unproven and the treatment itself is still experimental, it could not be considered a "core treatment" (one for which the province is required to pay). The decision quoted the original trial judge, noting that "the trial judge found only that in 'some cases' it may produce 'significant results'" 
A court in any country is not an ultimate authority on the effectiveness of a methodology.  That is for peer-reviewed journals and researchers to debate.  At best, this could be cited with the statement that not all jurisdictions accept ABA as a mandated treatment.  Judges are not scientists and researchers and this court case does not overturn all the peer-reviewed studies that demonstrate its effectiveness.  To oppose the pro- peer reviewed scientific articles requires other peer-reviewed articles criticizing ABA.  In addition, this is a statement about reimbursement of health care costs rather than real effectiveness.  
:...ranging from its early dependency on aversives
ABA no longer relies as heavily on aversives, as documented in the paragraph that existed before it was replaced with the current one.  It was sourced.  Not the best sources, but still sourced.  
:(in the original experiments the aversive was a cattle prod)
Original experiments, which means that cattle prods are no longer used.  At best this could be placed in the history section if a reliable source can be found.  As is, it seems serves little purpose than a POV push on the roots of ABA
:...to its goals of "extinguishing" even harmless autistic behavior such as stimming and rendering the child "undistinguishable from peers."
Punishment and aversives are pretty much used just for dangerous behaviour now, not stimming.  Again an idea for the history section.  In addition, it's very POV.
:Michelle Dawson, an autistic woman, filed an intervener factum in the Auton case challenging ABA on ethical grounds. 
I don't see the point of this in this section.  It could be put in its own bullet of 'ethical challenges', but would require much more context and is really better off on either her page, or the ethical challenges to autism treatment page. WLU 00:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms section 

message: I removed the following segment:
"However, as ABA is not a single organization, there remain practitioners that rely on aversives, sometimes extreme ones. The most notable of these cases is the Judge Rotenberg Center in Canton, Massachusetts, however that center remains controversial even among ABA practitioners."
This can't stay on the page without a citation, and a reliable one.  It's an exceptional claim and requires a reliable source.  It's a pretty extreme claim and must be sourced.  WLU 00:44, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed