There seems to be consensus on the fact that social stimuli don´t acquire the function of a reinforcer for children with autism, as it does for most other children, both typically developed and children with other development disorders. And it´s becoming obvious that the lack of reinforcement effect of social stimuli, is impeding the development and learning of joint attention, language and derived relational responding.
The exist some research on the process and different procedures of establishing social stimuli as reinforcers. The last couple of days, I have been presented with some empirical data showing effect on the procedure outlined by Holth (2005), in pairing social stimuli with primary reinforcement. This data show promising results, and will quite easily blend in regular teaching sessions, and can be implemented through the day. I think the question now needs to be addressed is how early it´s possible to condition these stimuli for children with autism. And how this will affect the course and results of EIBI.
After some time with some difficulties getting the book Derived Relational Responding Applications for Learners with Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities: A Progressive Guide to Change, by Rehfeldt and Barnes-Holmes. I finally got it today.
I have really been looking forward to reading this book, and I have to say; I´m really impressed. It´s even better than I expected! I have been interested in Relational Frame Theory and derived relational responding for some time, especially applied to young learners with autism. So I´m been reading a lot of great litterature. But the great thing about this book is the applied focus in it.
Based on many of the chapters in the book, you can apply effective teaching for young learners. I find this book a great, and needed, contribution to the field of derived relational responding. I really hope that this way of spread the procedures and rationales behind teaching based on derived relational responding, will lead to the needed empirical work this theory really needs.
Hope more practitioners apply these procedures, and contribute with data to support or, of course, not supporting this theory.
Exciting new research from Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University poses the theory that autism spectrum disorders (ASD) in fact is a disorder caused by impaired regulation of the locus coeruleus. Locus coeruleus is a bundle of neurons in the brain stem that processes sensory signals from all areas of the body. And the researchers state several findings that support this theory.
And in the ascpect of treatment, who of course is the point of discorvering causions, the researchers state:
“the future of autism treatment probably lies in drugs that selectively target certain types of noradrenergic brain receptors or, more likely, in epigenetic therapies targeting genes of the LC-NA system.”
But it’s probably some time into the future….
Technology Evaluation Center (TEC) located in Chicago has published a Special Report: Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention Based on Applied Behavior Analysis among Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders.
The report does not answer the questions outlined, but calls for more reserach, and concludes:
“Overall, the quality and consistency of results of this body of evidence are weak. Consequently, no conclusions can be drawn from this literature on how well EIBI works. Weaknesses in research design and analysis, as well as inconsistent results across studies, undermine confidence in the reported results. It is important to distinguish between certainty about ineffectiveness and uncertainty about effectiveness. Based on the weakness of the available evidence, we are uncertain about the effectiveness of EIBI for ASDs.”
This report is not published in a scentific an peer-reviewed publication, and the methology and results must be evaluated from that perspective. Specially since the report is marked ©2009 Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association – an insurance company. The report must be read in light of the present debate on insurance coverage. It´s alarming that the debate uses scientific reports that are not published and not peer-reviewed. Such debates should be based on science and the evidence that are present!
The report can be downloaded here. For other post on the effectiveness of EIBI, se “current status“, “outcome of comprehensive“, and “comprehensive synthesis“
Recent Comments