Behavioral Artistry: Examining the Relationship Between the Interpersonal Skills and Effective Practice Repertoires of Applied Behavior Analysis Practitioners

Kevin Callahan,Gabrielle Segal,Smita Mehta,Rachita Sharma,Richard M Foxx,Mary-Ellen Mccomb,Andrew Donald,Susan M Nichols,Adam Swierczynski,Xing Aerts

doi:10.1007/s10803-019-04082-1

Abstract

This study investigated interpersonal skills associated with the concept of behavioral artistry (BA), a repertoire of practitioner behaviors including care, attentiveness, and creativity, among others, associated with the effective delivery of applied behavior analysis (ABA) treatment. Survey results indicated parents of children with autism preferred BA descriptors for ABA therapists over non-BA descriptors. A separate survey of 212 university students on a standardized personality assessment revealed students majoring and/or working in the field of ABA had lower levels of BA than those in other human services professions. Practitioners with higher BA scores were observed and rated more positively in their delivery of ABA for children with autism. Implications for training/supervising effective ABA practitioners within a BA model are discussed.

Highlights

The evidence for the long-term effectiveness of applied behavior analysis (ABA) in the treatment of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is vast (Foxx 2016)
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders (2019) 49:3557–3570 often view the highly structured nature of some ABA treatment procedures as overly “mechanical,” and children’s responses to ABA’s Discrete Trial Training (DTT) protocols have been called robotic, prompt dependent, and lacking in both spontaneity and generalization of treatment effects (Schreibman 2005). While many of these and other critiques have been addressed and redressed (e.g., Foxx 2016; Maurice et al 1996; Morris 2009), lingering related issues may be responsible for lower levels of social validity for the ABA approach when compared to other autism treatment models (Callahan et al 2010)
In a recent review of the skills needed for ABA practitioners to conduct effective programming for individuals with ASD, Leaf et al (2016) identified intervention components related to what they describe as a “progressive” and “responsive” approach to the delivery of ABA services

Summary

Introduction

The evidence for the long-term effectiveness of applied behavior analysis (ABA) in the treatment of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is vast (Foxx 2016). Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders (2019) 49:3557–3570 often view the highly structured nature of some ABA treatment procedures as overly “mechanical,” and children’s responses to ABA’s Discrete Trial Training (DTT) protocols have been called robotic, prompt dependent, and lacking in both spontaneity and generalization of treatment effects (Schreibman 2005) While many of these and other critiques have been addressed and redressed (e.g., Foxx 2016; Maurice et al 1996; Morris 2009), lingering related issues may be responsible for lower levels of social validity for the ABA approach when compared to other autism treatment models (Callahan et al 2010). According to Leaf and colleagues, the pervasive use of ABA in autism treatment has resulted in changes in its scope and focus, and behavioral interventions have become potentially less effective:

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion