Flexible prompt fading (FPF) is a prompting system which is based upon the instructor’s clinical judgment and in-the-moment assessment of variables that influence continual adjustments to the prompting hierarchy and prompt types used during teaching. To date, the studies evaluating FPF have made use of providing a list of guidelines to interventionists with many years of extensive training and experience with the implementation of FPF and discrete trial teaching alongside higher degrees of education (e.g., master’s level, doctoral level). It is unclear if an interventionist with less experience can implement FPF effectively when provided with the same guidelines and instructions as in previous studies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of FPF when implemented by an interventionist with less experience than those in previous FPF studies. A concurrent multiple baseline design was used to evaluate the replicability and efficacy of FPF for three children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. The results indicated that FPF was replicable with this interventionist and effective for teaching all three children to expressively label novel targets.
Results of quality behavioral intervention can be life-altering for our consumers. For our consumers to reach their fullest potential it requires that our interventionists are well-trained and that they are implementing behavioral intervention with a high degree of quality and fidelity. Practitioner training has evolved over the years and some of the standards appear to be improving. However, there are still numerous concerns with the training of behavior analysts. The purpose of this article is to describe some concerns with practitioner training and offer suggestions about how we can improve training within the field of applied behavior analysis.
Wilkenfeld and McCarthy’s 2020 article, “Ethical Concerns with Applied Behavior Analysis for Autism Spectrum ‘Disorder’,” is part of a growing line of peer-reviewed articles that are critical of interventions based on the principles of applied behavior analysis (ABA) for autistics/individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Throughout this article, the authors make claims that ABA-based intervention is abusive, coercive, and results in negative outcomes (e.g., Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) for autistic/individuals diagnosed with ASD utilizing a bioethics framework. More specifically, the purpose of this article is to provide an analysis and discussion of Wilkenfeld and McCarthy’s rationales and conclusions by highlighting areas of agreement and concern, and those requiring additional clarification. We hope this analysis will help continue progressing the field of ABA-based interventions for autistic children and their families, advance discussions among behavior analysts and their consumers, and underscore pathways forward for all involved.
Supervising other behavior change agents is commonly a primary responsibility for Board Certified Behavior Analysts® (BCBAs®). The Supervision Training Curriculum (2.0) produced by the Behavior Analyst Certification Board® (BACB®) outlines the supervision content that all BCBAs are supposed to be trained in. The primary purpose of this study was to analyze the extent to which Registered Behavior Technicians® (RBTs®) reported supervision experiences aligned with the expectations outlined in the Supervision Training Curriculum (2.0) as a way to gauge common practices for supervising RBTs. A 96-item survey consisting of questions adapted from the Supervision Training Curriculum (2.0) was created and administered using Qualtrics™. The survey was completed by 936 individuals who reported currently or formerly holding an RBT certification. The results indicated that reported supervision practices vary in their alignment with the supervision training curriculum according to RBTs.
One of the primary purposes of teaching new skills is that the skill generalizes across people and places. Ultimately, the goal of the Autism Partnership Method is teaching results in displaying newly acquired skills within the environment in which the skill is necessary and useful. Two concepts that are important in teaching are stimulus control and generalization. In this chapter, we highlight some research and related terms with respect to stimulus control. Further, we describe the concept of generalization, some research associated with generalization, and methods to help promote generalization.
