|
Treatment Outcomes Across Type of Reinforcement and Treatment Setting for Persons With ASD and ID |
Tuesday, May 28, 2013 |
9:00 AM–10:20 AM |
102 D-E (Convention Center) |
Area: CBM/AUT; Domain: Applied Research |
Chair: Wendy K. Berg (University of Iowa) |
Discussant: Richard G. Smith (University of North Texas) |
Abstract: Three treatment outcome studies that focus primarily on persons with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) will be presented. The first study is a metaanalysis comparing the efficacy of two types of positive reinforcement (e.g., attention and tangible) as treatment components for persons with ASD. Treatment effects (Cohen's D values) are compared across reinforcer type, participant diagnosis, and intervention goals. The second study presents treatment outcomes for people who received treatment for severe challenging behavior within an extended day treatment program. Treatment effects were evaluated for 35 participants with ASD or other developmental disabilities. The outcomes for each participant are examined across controlled and generalized settings. The effects of conducting functional communication training via a telehealth system are the focus of the third presentation. Participants for this study include 17 children with ASD who engaged in severe challenging behavior. All assessment and treatment procedures were conducted via telehealth with the parent and a parent coach conducting sessions with remote coaching from a behavior analyst. Rick Smith will serve as the discussant for this symposium. |
Keyword(s): Autism, Challenging behaviors, Functional reinforcers, Treatment effects, |
|
Reinforcer Efficacy of Social Reinforcement for Individuals With ASD: A Meta-analysis |
ANDREW M. RODEWALD (Utah State University), Andrew Samaha (Utah State University), Megan A. Boyle (Utah State University), Audrey N. Hoffman (Utah State University), Ciceley I. Nickerson (Utah State University), Hayley Halversen (Utah State University ) |
Abstract: Impaired social interactions are a hallmark of autism spectrum disorders (ASD; DSM-IV-TR, 2000). These impairments may indicate lower reinforcer efficacy for social reinforcers (e.g., praise; attention) than other forms of positive reinforcement (Kohls, et al., 2011; Munson, Benavidez, Stabinsky-Compton, Paclawskyi, & Bagilo, 1996; e.g., tangibles, edibles). To examine reinforcer efficacy of social reinforcers, a metaanalysis was conducted to examine reinforcer efficacy of social reinforcement for individuals with ASD. Mean standard differences effect sizes (e.g., Cohens d) were calculated for individual subjects to characterize treatment effects compared to baseline performance. Cohens d values were compared across different reinforcer types, different diagnoses, and different intervention goals (e.g., decreasing problem behavior; skill training). Results revealed a significant difference between social reinforcement and other positive reinforcers for individuals with ASD and a significant difference between social reinforcers being used alone and in combination with other types of positive reinforcers. These results indicate that while social reinforcers alone can be effective in behavior change for individuals with ASD, other positive reinforcers, either alone or in combination with social reinforcers, tended to be more effective. |
|
Treatment Outcomes of Children With Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities Seen in a Severe Behavior Day Treatment Program |
NATALIE PARKS (Marcus Autism Center), Daniel Conine (Marcus Autism Center), William G. Sharp (Marcus Autism Center), Nathan Call (Marcus Autism Center) |
Abstract: Problem behaviors are one of the most significant challenges faced by individuals with autism and other developmental disabilities and their families. Behaviors including aggression, self-injury, and pica can cause serious injuries to the individual or their caregivers. Similarly, other behavior such as elopement, tantrums, and property destruction can cause severe risk for abduction and injury and can result in more restrictive educational or residential placements. A review of the literature indicated that 10-15% of individuals with developmental disabilities engage in some form of problem behavior and that 5-10% engage in at least one form that presented a serious management problem for caregivers (Emerson, 2001). Most studies that have examined the effectiveness of treatments for severe problem behavior have consisted of a small number of participants. The purpose of this study was to examine the outcomes of those treated for severe problem behavior in a day treatment program over a 3-year time span. Thirty-five children participated in the study. Outcomes for each participant in both controlled and generalized settings were examined. Percent reduction, non-overlap of all pairs, and effect size values were calculated to determine the overall effectiveness of this program. The results are displayed in Table 1. This is a data-based presentation. |
|
Conducting Functional Communication Training via Teleconsultation |
DAVID P. WACKER (University of Iowa), John F. Lee (University of Iowa), Yaniz C. Padilla Dalmau (University of Iowa), Scott D. Lindgren (University of Iowa), Todd G. Kopelman (University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics), Kelly Pelzel (University of Iowa), Debra Waldron (University of Iowa) |
Abstract: The purpose of this study was to evaluate if functional communication training (FCT) could be conducted effectively via a teleconsultation model. The participants for this study were 17 young children who had been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder and who engaged in problem behavior such as aggression or self-injury. A functional analysis, also completed via teleconsultation, was conducted for all participants (Wacker et al., in press). The functional analyses were conducted by parent assistants and the childs parents at a local clinic with remote coaching from a trained behavior analyst. Following the functional analysis, FCT was implemented by the childrens parents in the local clinics. At each clinic site, a parent assistant was available to assist the parent by setting up toys, etc. The parents conducted all FCT sessions with weekly 1-hr remote coaching provided by a trained behavior analyst. FCT was conducted within a nonconcurrent multiple baseline design. IOA was conducted in approximately 30% of all sessions and averaged over 90%. In the figure, six case examples are provided. The results show that the children responded positively to FCT. The results will be discussed in terms of how more behavioral treatments might be conducted via teleconsultation. |
|
|