Abatement of intractable vocal stereotypy using an overcorrection procedure

Defining and Measuring Indices of Happiness and Unhappiness in Children Diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Improving quality of life (QoL) is the goal of behavior analytic services, but there can be barriers to assessing the QoL of autistic children due to characteristics inherent in the condition. Given that happiness is a fundamental element of QoL, previous research has relied on behavioral indicators of mood (e.g., smiling, crying) to evaluate the overall QoL of disabled individuals. However, the use of these traditional indices may not accurately reflect the emotional well-being of autistic individuals, who are known to engage in idiosyncratic mood indicators. The current study replicated selected procedures from Parsons et al. (2012) to identify and validate the unique mood indicators of young autistic children. The study showed that individualized indices of happiness and unhappiness could be operationally defined and reliably measured among these children. Key findings and limitations of this study are discussed, and the implications of these findings are presented.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40617-022-00710-y.

An evaluation of a punisher assessment for decreasing automatically reinforced problem behavior

We extended research on the identification and evaluation of potential punishers for decreasing automatically reinforced problem behavior in four individuals with autism spectrum disorder. A punisher selection interview was conducted with lead clinicians to identify socially acceptable punishers. During the treatment evaluation, treatment phases were introduced sequentially and included noncontingent reinforcement (NCR), NCR and differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA), and NCR-and-DRA with punishment. During the NCR-and-DRA with punishment phase, four to five potential punishers were evaluated using a multielement design. Dependent measures included the target problem behavior, appropriate item engagement, and emotional responding. For all participants, NCR-and-DRA was not effective and punishment was necessary. However, the most effective punisher identified in the context of NCR-and-DRA differed across participants.

Differential Reinforcement of Other Behaviors to Treat Challenging Behaviors Among Children With Autism: A Systematic and Quality Review

This review summarizes the literature regarding differential reinforcement of other behaviors (DRO) to treat challenging behavior among children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and determines the quality of studies among the current literature according to the 2014 Council for Exceptional Children (CEC): Standards for Evidence-Based Practices in Special Education. Studies that focused on the use of DRO in the treatment of challenging behavior for individuals with ASD were included for systematic analysis. Forty-five studies were identified for inclusion in this review and were evaluated using the eight quality indicators described by the CEC. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the only systematic review of the literature that evaluates DRO as an intervention for individuals diagnosed with ASD. Principle findings, practical recommendations, and areas of future research are discussed.

Using Single-Case Experiments to Support Evidence-Based Decisions: How Much Is Enough?

For practitioners, the use of single-case experimental designs (SCEDs) in the research literature raises an important question: How many single-case experiments are enough to have sufficient confidence that an intervention will be effective with an individual from a given population? Although standards have been proposed to address this question, current guidelines do not appear to be strongly grounded in theory or empirical research. The purpose of our article is to address this issue by presenting guidelines to facilitate evidence-based decisions by adopting a simple statistical approach to quantify the support for interventions that have been validated using SCEDs. Specifically, we propose the use of success rates as a supplement to support evidence-based decisions. The proposed methodology allows practitioners to aggregate the results from single-case experiments to estimate the probability that a given intervention will produce a successful outcome. We also discuss considerations and limitations associated with this approach.

Examining the Echolalia Literature: Where Do Speech-Language Pathologists Stand?

PURPOSE

Echolalia is a common element in the communication of individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Recent contributions to the literature reflect significant disagreement regarding how echolalia should be defined, understood, and managed. The purpose of this review article is to give speech-language pathologists and others a comprehensive view of the available perspectives on echolalia.

METHOD

Published literature from the disciplines of behavioral intervention, linguistics, and speech-language intervention is discussed. Special areas of focus include operational definitions, rationales associated with various approaches, specific procedures used to treat or study echolalic behavior, and reported conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Dissimilarities in the definition and understanding of echolalia have led to vastly different approaches to management. Evidence-based practice protocols are available to guide speech-language interventionists in their work with individuals with autism spectrum disorders.

An analysis of contingency statements in a DRO procedure: A case report

OBJECTIVE

To examine latency to criterion for reduction of challenging behaviour with and without stating a contingency statement immediately prior to a DRO procedure.

METHOD

An ABAC design in which A was baseline, B was used to evaluate the efficacy of a DRO procedure, and C was used to evaluate the efficacy of a DRO procedure with a contingency statement.

RESULTS

The DRO with the contingency statement intervention was associated with a shorter latency to behaviour change than the DRO procedure without the contingency statement.

DISCUSSION

These preliminary findings from this case study highlight the importance of examining the efficiency of behaviour change procedures. Directions for future research are provided.