Archive

Posts Tagged ‘” Autism”’

Updated Part 3 – Teaching Discrimination to Children with Autism and Overcoming Error Patterns

September 22, 2017 Leave a comment

The author is a Board Certified Behavior Analyst working with Behavior Momentum India. The views in this blog are his own. I hope to keep in mind parents and therapists as I write and will try to keep the jargon to a minimum. Do feel free to contact me via smbehavioranalysis@gmail.com

In parts 1 and 2 of this series, we saw the various examples and types of errors children with autism and learning disabilities make.  In the concluding part of this series, we will see some proven strategies to overcoming error patterns while teaching receptive language.

 

Don’t be too sure that the child ‘knows’ – do a counterbalanced assessment with distractors

Firstly it is important not to be satisfied with a confident assertion that the child ‘knows’ and has acquired the targeted discrimination. The first is done by performing a thorough assessment with the target items and distractors counterbalanced across all positions and across the number of times asked for.

For example, if you are testing for discrimination between say a,b and c ( or tiger/ leopard/panther or cup/spoon/ fork for that matter) then a minimum of 18 trial probes will be needed.  a, b and c should appear in each of the three positions in the array equal number of times and the instruction asking the child to select a,b or c should be done an equal number of times for each one in each position. This will help us find out if there is a  position bias in the students responding, a dominant item response or other errors such as win-stay errors.  An example of a counterbalced array is as below for assessments.

Array Position of stimuli Ask For Observer 1 Observer 2
Left Mid Right SD
1 yellow PINK brown   brown
2 PINK yellow brown PINK
3 brown yellow PINK yellow
4 yellow brown PINK yellow
5 brown PINK yellow brown
6 PINK brown yellow yellow
7 brown yellow PINK PINK
8 PINK yellow brown yellow
9 yellow PINK brown yellow
10 yellow brown PINK PINK
11 PINK brown yellow PINK
12 brown yellow PINK brown
13 PINK yellow brown brown
14 brown PINK yellow yellow
15 yellow brown PINK brown
16 brown PINK yellow PINK
17 PINK brown yellow brown
18 yellow PINK brown PINK

I once had a heart-rending situation.  Mom was confident that ‘Of course, my child knows his mom’. With due permissions, I ran a test. when there were 3 ladies, one of them being mom standing at random distances from the child we asked the child to give some item to mom, he would go and give it to the nearest person. The results were not much better when they were equidistant or when we instructed the child to “go to mom”. While the child would engage in play and singing with rhymes and other manners of sharing affection with her, he could not respond based on the instruction, “give this to mom” or ” go and touch mom”

Don’t be too sure that the student ‘knows’ – Are there some inadvertent prompts :

To rule out the possibility of inadvertent prompts a parent or therapist may be giving, it is important to have other people conduct the same set of assessments. If the child succeeds with everyone with a scientific assessment then it is possible to conclude that the discrimination is acquired. If the child is not able to make correct selections at more than chance rate ( only 33% of the times correct when an array of 3 stimuli is used and child is asked to select one randomly) with other people then either there is a failure to generalize, or, more likely the discrimination acquired is faulty.

Re-cap: error patterns exist if:

■Selection is right sometimes – wrong sometimes “ inconsistent”

■Response starts before instruction is given ( the student is basing responses on some ‘rule’ other than listening to you and selecting’)

■Child attends to /looks at a particular stimulus before instruction is given ( Sometimes instructors instruction coincides with child’s pre-selection)

■Responding occurs  without scanning  ( but some do respond well without directly looking)

■Escape behaviors happen  during receptive ID tasks

The first step is to ensure correct level of  discrimination in target selection :It is not a good idea to train fine or nuanced discriminations if grosser discriminations are not in place – Example – subtle shades in colors, words such as meet/ meat , sew/ sue, concept of honest vs dishonest/ b,d,p,q .

Some strategies to overcome error patterns in teaching receptive language/  discrimination tasks:

No one procedure is guaranteed to work. but if you give considerable thought to the various options you have and if you are prepared to be flexible and if you take data on correct responding and errors under different strategies you will soon find what would work. For a full tutorial read Grow and LeBlanc (2013) – they have put it all together in the form of a tutorial. You will still need a guidance from an experienced Behavior Analyst for children with severe discrimination problems

  • get an observing/ attending  to the stimuli   before  the student responds :
    • Prompt to attend to the therapist – ” look at me” / other attention getting tactics before issuing instruction
    • It can be a simple prompt to look at each of the stimuli
    • A prompt to attend to a critical feature – match stripes before asking to select zebra from an array of zebra, horse, and deer.
    • student echoes  the instruction to confirm that he has heard it right ( Instructor says “zebra”, student says “zebra” and then proceeds to select Zebra from an array of 3 animals
    • Non-vocal children can make a sign corresponding to the instruction and proceed to make a selection
    • In fine discrimination exercises, example ‘b’ vs. ‘d’ – answer first whether the semi-circle is to the right of the line or to the left
  • Minimize inadvertent prompts from parent or therapist such as
    • eye gaze prompts – look directly at learners face and avoid looking at stimuli while giving instructions
    • A relaxing of facial features when student hovers over the right selection
    • small movements of therapists hands or eye movements
    • patterns of instruction ( example always ‘cow’ first, ‘horse’ second and ‘zebra’ third; position-wise – Right, middle, left)
  • Introduce multiple targets simultaneously – over teaching one may make it difficult to introduce new targets
  • By rotation, cover each target equal number of times within a session
  • Introducing sequentially is not recommended as teaching in isolation, simple discrimination is not likely to help with acquiring subsequent discriminations ( Grow et al., 2011, Gutierrez et al., 2009)
  • Use at least an array of 3 unless you are targeting opposites- with 2, the student has a 50% chance of being right anyways !
  • Improve Behavior consequence – A strong reinforcer for correct response And a loss of privileges or delay to reward – guided by Fisher, Pawich, Dickes, Paden  & Toussaint (2014).
  • If there is a position or side bias – counteract with more trials with success in other positions or increase array size
  • If there is a long history of errors with certain targets consider starting with a new set of targets  altogether

If the responding demonstrates improved discrimination, you are on the right track. Otherwise be flexible, look at the rate of correct and error responses across sessions and with professional guidance attempt an alternate strategy.

Happy teaching discrimination.

Selected References

 

Fisher, W. W., Pawich, T. L., Dickes, N., Paden, A. R., & Toussaint, K. (2014). Increasing the saliency of behavior–       consequence relations for children with autism who exhibit persistent errors. Journal of applied behavior analysis47(4), 738-748.

Grow, L., & LeBlanc, L. (2013). Teaching Receptive Language Skills. Behavior analysis in practice6(1), 56-75

Advertisements

Part 3 – The Errors we See- Discrimination challenges in children with autism and Learning Disabilities

September 21, 2017 2 comments

The author is a Board Certified Behavior Analyst working with Behavior Momentum India. The views in this blog are his own. I hope to keep in mind parents and therapists as I write and will try to keep the jargon to a minimum. Do feel free to contact me via smbehavioranalysis@gmail.com

In parts 1 and 2 of this series, we saw the various examples and types of errors children with autism and learning disabilities make.  In the concluding part of this series, we will see some proven strategies to overcoming error patterns while teaching receptive language.

 

Don’t be too sure that the child ‘knows’ – do a counterbalanced assessment with distractors

Firstly it is important not to be satisfied with a confident assertion that the child ‘knows’ and has acquired the targeted discrimination. The first is done by performing a thorough assessment with the target items and distractors counterbalanced across all positions and across the number of times asked for.

For example, if you are testing for discrimination between say a,b and c ( or tiger/ leopard/panther or cup/spoon/ fork for that matter) then a minimum of 18 trial probes will be needed.  a, b and c should appear in each of the three positions in the array equal number of times and the instruction asking the child to select a,b or c should be done an equal number of times for each one in each position. This will help us find out if there is a  position bias in the students responding, a dominant item response or other errors such as win-stay errors.  An example of a counterbalced array is as below for assessments.

Array Position of stimuli Ask For Observer 1 Observer 2
Left Mid Right SD
1 yellow PINK brown   brown
2 PINK yellow brown PINK
3 brown yellow PINK yellow
4 yellow brown PINK yellow
5 brown PINK yellow brown
6 PINK brown yellow yellow
7 brown yellow PINK PINK
8 PINK yellow brown yellow
9 yellow PINK brown yellow
10 yellow brown PINK PINK
11 PINK brown yellow PINK
12 brown yellow PINK brown
13 PINK yellow brown brown
14 brown PINK yellow yellow
15 yellow brown PINK brown
16 brown PINK yellow PINK
17 PINK brown yellow brown
18 yellow PINK brown PINK

I once had a heart-rending situation.  Mom was confident that ‘Of course, my child knows his mom’. With due permissions, I ran a test. when there were 3 ladies, one of them being mom standing at random distances from the child we asked the child to give some item to mom, he would go and give it to the nearest person. The results were not much better when they were equidistant or when we instructed the child to “go to mom”. While the child would engage in play and singing with rhymes and other manners of sharing affection with her, he could not respond based on the instruction, “give this to mom” or ” go and touch mom”

Don’t be too sure that the student ‘knows’ – Are there some inadvertent prompts :

To rule out the possibility of inadvertent prompts a parent or therapist may be giving, it is important to have other people conduct the same set of assessments. If the child succeeds with everyone with a scientific assessment then it is possible to conclude that the discrimination is acquired. If the child is not able to make correct selections at more than chance rate ( only 33% of the times correct when an array of 3 stimuli is used and child is asked to select one randomly) with other people then either there is a failure to generalize, or, more likely the discrimination acquired is faulty.

Re-cap: error patterns exist if:

■Selection is right sometimes – wrong sometimes “ inconsistent”

■Response starts before instruction is given ( the student is basing responses on some ‘rule’ other than listening to you and selecting’)

■Child attends to /looks at a particular stimulus before instruction is given ( Sometimes instructors instruction coincides with child’s pre-selection)

■Responding occurs  without scanning  ( but some do respond well without directly looking)

■Escape behaviors happen  during receptive ID tasks

The first step is to ensure correct level of  discrimination in target selection :It is not a good idea to train fine or nuanced discriminations if grosser discriminations are not in place – Example – subtle shades in colors, words such as meet/ meat , sew/ sue, concept of honest vs dishonest

discrimination applicators-2022599_1280

 

Some strategies to overcome error patterns in teaching receptive language/  discrimination tasks:

No one procedure is guaranteed to work. but if you give considerable thought to the various options you have and if you are prepared to be flexible and if you take data on correct responding and errors under different strategies you will soon find what would work. For a full tutorial read Grow and LeBlanc (2013) – they have put it all together in the form of a tutorial. You will still need a guidance from an experienced Behavior Analyst for children with severe discrimination problems

  • get an observing/ attending  to the stimuli   before  the student responds :
    • Prompt to attend to the therapist – ” look at me” / other attention getting tactics before issuing instruction
    • It can be a simple prompt to look at each of the stimuli
    • A prompt to attend to a critical feature – match stripes before asking to select zebra from an array of zebra, horse, and deer.
    • student echoes  the instruction to confirm that he has heard it right ( Instructor says “zebra”, student says “zebra” and then proceeds to select Zebra from an array of 3 animals
    • Non-vocal children can make a sign corresponding to the instruction and proceed to make a selection
    • In fine discrimination exercises, example ‘b’ vs. ‘d’ – answer first whether the semi-circle is to the right of the line or to the left
  • Minimize inadvertent prompts from parent or therapist such as
    • eye gaze prompts – look directly at learners face and avoid looking at stimuli while giving instructions
    • A relaxing of facial features when student hovers over the right selection
    • small movements of therapists hands or eye movements
    • patterns of instruction ( example always ‘cow’ first, ‘horse’ second and ‘zebra’ third; position-wise – Right, middle, left)
  • Introduce multiple targets simultaneously – over teaching one may make it difficult to introduce new targets
  • By rotation, cover each target equal number of times within a session
  • Introducing sequentially is not recommended as teaching in isolation, simple discrimination is not likely to help with acquiring subsequent discriminations ( Grow et al., 2011, Gutierrez et al., 2009)
  • Use at least an array of 3 unless you are targeting opposites- with 2, the student has a 50% chance of being right anyways !
  • Improve Behavior consequence – A strong reinforcer for correct response And a loss of privileges or delay to reward – guided by Fisher, Pawich, Dickes, Paden  & Toussaint (2014).
  • If there is a position or side bias – counteract with more trials with success in other positions or increase array size
  • If there is a long history of errors with certain targets consider starting with a new set of targets  altogether

If the responding demonstrates improved discrimination, you are on the right track. Otherwise be flexible, look at the rate of correct and error responses across sessions and with professional guidance attempt an alternate strategy.

Happy teaching discrimination.

Selected References

 

Fisher, W. W., Pawich, T. L., Dickes, N., Paden, A. R., & Toussaint, K. (2014). Increasing the saliency of behavior–       consequence relations for children with autism who exhibit persistent errors. Journal of applied behavior analysis47(4), 738-748.

Grow, L., & LeBlanc, L. (2013). Teaching Receptive Language Skills. Behavior analysis in practice6(1), 56-75

The Errors we See- Discrimination challenges in children with autism and Learning Disabilities – Part I

July 22, 2017 1 comment

The author is a Board-Certified Behavior Analyst and works with Behavior Momentum India as a Research Associate, Faculty in teaching Applied Behavior Analysis course sequence and trains therapists who work with children with autism. He attempts to avoid jargon to make topics in Applied Behavior Analysis intelligible to parents of children with autism and learning disabilities, students, and therapists. The views in this blog are his own. This is the first blog and is expected to run into 3 parts because of the vast amount challenges in teaching receptive language to children with autism and recent advances.

David is a 4-year-old boy with developmental disabilities. One day his mom was excited. She was working at training identification of everyday objects from a small array of 3 different objects and he seemed to get it right with 7-8 objects such as a spoon, cup, top and fork wherever they are placed in an array. At the ABA center he went to during the day, his case manager was surprised by mom’s report. At the center, David would only get his identifications right only 25- 30% of the time, around a chance level of success, as if he were selecting randomly. He requisitioned videos of sessions from home and played them a few times over and found that a simplified array of stimuli was being used. There would be the target object, selecting which produced rewards and two other objects such as scissors and crayon that the parent never asked. David had figured that he needs to go for the spoon or the cup whenever they appeared in the array- he did not have to listen to what was asked for and make a discriminated selection. When probed with spoon, cup, and fork in the same array, hi correct selections dropped to chance levels as now the correct response depended on his selection also tallying with what the adult asked for.


Girls who buy nail polish need to know the difference between two shades that are close to each other in appearance- one could be “just her type” and another one not so! Children with autism and learning disabilities often have serious problems mastering discrimination tasks. One of the reasons is making a selection based on one element or feature of an object instead of attending to all the parts. This is called stimulus over selectivity. For instance, a child whose attention is only on wheels may not be able to identify a car if a truck and a van are also present in the array of vehicle pictures. Examples of making a response based on attending to an incorrect part abound. Discrimination training procedures involve the use of rewarding correct responses, prompting and prompt fading procedures and may inadvertently result in responses with errors or prompt dependence.

Let’s look at some more examples of errors. At a simple level, let us say a student is taught to respond to the instruction “touch head” by touching his or her own head. When “touch elbow” is introduced as a next target, the student could proceed to touch his head as soon as he hears the word “touch”. Similar problems exist with training to answer questions such as “what is your name” and  “What is your mother’s name”. The response “David” could be blurted out as soon as “what is” is heard. A child who is taught to answer “air” when asked what does fan give could reply with “air” when asked what does cow give”. It is quite possible that the “what” or “give” part of the question controls the students answer of “air” and not the “fan” or “cow”.

At a certain stage of learning, generalization must stop and discrimination must set in. There could also be a problem of over generalization without discrimination setting in (or being taught). A child taught to request for “hug” from parent’s could request hug from complete strangers. A child who is taught to say “daddy” with her dad’s picture (let’s say dad sports a beard in the picture) starts labeling other pictures of persons with a beard also as “daddy”. Many children on the spectrum who perform discriminative tasks with nouns well, fail when it comes to discriminating even between the basic colors of red, blue, green and yellow. I have come across students who do a perfect job of matching red card to card, blue card to blue card and so on. However, when they are asked to point at the red card or the yellow card or the blue, in an array that has all these cards things start going wrong. There is some other discrimination issue at work here. Discrimination challenges are part of everyday life with all humans. Husbands could buy the wrong gift on the anniversary day, a writer, could place too many, commas in his sentences, or cops could overlook important evidence at the crime site and obsess with non-essentials while the criminal is thriving and on the run. However, with children with autism and other learning disabilities, these problems acquire serious proportions across several areas of their learning and the error patterns could become stronger confounding parents and therapists.
Behavior Analysts use research based methods to identify error patterns, understand why they could occur in discrimination training and use specific strategies to overcome these.I will look forward to examining additional error patterns and the current state of research on how they can be overcome in the next parts of this series on discrimination training.

Your queries will help me reflect further. Do send them to smbehavioranalysis@gmail.com

Errorless learning is the way- time to think outside trial and error

Trial and error learning is often counterproductive and too often we cannot afford the cost of errors especially when teaching children with learning disabilities. The proponents of trial and error learning will show you the example of throwing a baby into water without any training and behold! it swims!!!!. This is not an entirely  accurate proposition as babies may have certain reflex actions in their repertoire that may look like they are born with an ability to swim but it  is not true. such an attempt would be downright dangerous and irresponsible. Check out http://www.babycenter.com/404_is-it-true-that-babies-are-born-with-the-ability-to-swim_10313062.bc

We see examples of the danger and disasters that trial and error learning cause all around us. Recall the girl who, while learning to reverse crashed her car into a pillar in the basement and could never learn to drive after that. Do you not come across hundreds of children who ” hate math” ? Well they tried to learn by trial and error  and came across failures that stunt learning. If this is the case with typically developing chidren ( and adults) the problem with errors is much higher in children with learning disabilities trying to learn a new skill. If you have tried to teach them or have observed them being taught and you find that they engage in escape behaviors, fright reactions , aggression or behaviors suggestive of anxiety it is very probable that error rates are high. The necessary pre-requisites for successful performance may be missing or some irrelevant aspects of teaching procedures could be dictating the child’s response.These are also true about typical population where students fail in exams or people fail in their jobs without adequate training.

Dr. Murray Sidman, a pioneering behavioral scientist in  a 2010 publication argues that the typical learning curves which show an acceleration towards a peak performance (during which period learning is progressively happening by trial and error) followed by a plateau appears like pat explanation only because  such curves are developed by aggregating data of the learning process of hundreds of individuals. If an individual’s learning is tracked there will be seen a lot discontinuities and irregularities. He then presents an alternative learning path which is that when all pre-requisite skills are taught there is an instantaneous vertical climb (no acceleration or curve) to performance with all learning and no error. He quotes two simple and elegant examples from the non-human kingdom.

B. F. Skinner, taught rats to press a lever in a chamber in a errorless fashion by teaching 5 pre-requisites. He first let them explore a chamber and experience that the environment was safe. By mixing food pellets with the rats regular food, he taught them that pellets were food too. He then dropped the pellets in a food tray occasionally and the clanking noise from the dispenser was a indication of when pellets would be available. soon the rats started going to the dispenser whenever the dispenser made a sound and they picked up their food pellets.  Next a  lever was introduced in the chamber. When the rat pressed the lever the first time, the dispenser operated making a sound, the rat went to the food tray and ate the pellet. There after it continued pressing the lever at a high rate pausing only to eat the food pellets dispensed. The rat acquired the ‘lever pressing skill’ in a immediate fashion ( see figure 2 below). Imagine another rat which was not trained in the pre-requisites being let inside a similar chamber. How long could it be before it starts pressing the lever and accessing food is anybody’s guess. The latter rat may even give up after the fist lever press and stay hungry and anxious because it does not have the pre-requisite training to look into the food tray or even identify the food pellet as a reward.

Terrace in his Doctoral dissertation in 1963 built on the foundation and demonstrated error-less learning with pigeons. The first goal was to teach them to peck a key only when red light was on and not when green light was on in a chamber. He achieved this with a set of pigeons errorlessly by having the red light on in normal intensity and rewarding lever presses. He introduced the green light ( to which the pigeons should not respond) in a gradual fashion from low intensity to eventually an intensity equaling the red light. These pigeons made no error responses – never pecked the key when green light was on and always pecked when red light was on. Compare this with another group of pigeons which were introduced to both the lights at equal intensity from the start and they made a large number of error responses before acquiring the discrimination that it is worth pecking only when red light is on. There were many other brilliant facets to the great experiments done by Terrace. Suffice to note that the pigeons that learnt errorlessly also performed better later much after the training was withdrawn. Their learning endured. Another important note is that errors do not produce rewards and hence can produce fright reactions or aggressive behaviors.

Figure from sidman (2010)

The dad who successfully manages to teach his young son to cycle was not only patient but also manipulating the learning in such a way as to avoid nasty falls or unsuccessful turns. Every successful coach works hard on pre-requisites training and minimizing errors though he may seen to be commandeering. You would have doubtless come across the story of someone who succeeded in the eighteenth attempt. If you are able to examine closely you will find that the previous 17 attempts involved gaining some new ground everytime , identifying missing pre-requisites and working on them diligently and the 18th is a success. Otherwise if the previous attempts were a utter failure with no rewards contacted or no new pre-requisites identified it would have stopped at 2 or 3?

Behavior Analysts work towards promoting error less learning by a variety  of research based procedures such as shaping, prompts combined with effective and timely prompt fading procedures, evaluating the use of time delay before providing prompts, adding cues that can be faded to stimulus materials before fading and arranging rewards in proportion to task difficulty. There is now a large body of research that confirms the efficacy of these procedures not only in effectively facilitating skill acquisition but also in minimizing  escape responses and aggression during the teaching process. Pairing of the instructor with positive experiences and rewards also plays a key role. If  errors still occur then a Behavior Analyst would go deeper into component skills and focus training on those.

Play, A., Activities, G., & Team, T. (2017). Is it true that babies are born with the ability to swim? | BabyCenter.            BabyCenter. Retrieved 3 February 2017, from http://www.babycenter.com/404_is-it-true-that-babies-are-born-with-the-ability-to-swim_10313062.bc

Sidman, M. (2010). Errorless learning and programmed instruction: The myth of the learning curve. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 11(2), 167-180.

Terrace, H. S. (1963). Errorless transfer of a discrimination across two continua. Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 6(2), 223-232.

 

 

The art and science of generalization

November 8, 2016 Leave a comment

Note: The author is a Board Certified Behavior Analyst who works with Behavior Momentum India (www.behaviormomentum.com) . The views in the blogs are his own.I would like to thank a fellow Behavior Analyst,Dr. Geetika Agarwal, BCBA-D for her valuable comments and pointers on an earlier draft of this blog.

One of my  ‘aha’ moments came like this. I was teaching a boy on the autism spectrum to request (mand) information using ‘where’. Soon enough,he was asking “where are the crayons”, ” where is the scrabble box” and so on. One day, his mom came to observe his session, observed carefully, made notes and left after about 45 minutes. I was taking him around to play. He didn’t seemed very enthused about the play options and was looking a listless and a tad sad. A few more minutes later, he peered into my eyes and asked in a low sweet voice ” Sridhar, where is mummy? “. Aha…. generalization had happened and it was so functional and appropriate! We cannot always  assume that generalization will happen in due course. Rather, from the first instance of teaching any skill, generalization has to be planned for and programmed.

All of us generalize what we have learnt. Performing in practice tests to performing in a real exam, learning dining etiquette and using it in corporate dinner event, cracking jokes with friends to using humor in meetings , lectures or talks.. the examples are numerous. Generalization is important because the skill learnt in one setting needs to be used sometimes in vastly varying contexts.

Parents of children with autism and developmental disabilities are most concerned about this. We need generalization for sure.  If the child’s acquired skills do not generalize across people, different environments and across different contexts where they are meaningful the value of acquired skill is down to zero!  Like all good things , it needs to be planned for right from the beginning and when achieved  it needs to be balanced.  Over generalization or under generalization can be a problem  too. consider the following scenarios:

Image result for over generalization fallacyImage result for generalization

  1. Neeraj has learnt to wash hands independently but he does that only at home independently. In a restaurant or at a friends place, after a meal he may not proceed to wash his hands.
  2. Pranav sits and attends appropriately to task in the math class but not in the english class
  3. Keerthi a 3 year old girl has been taught to point at mummy and daddy when asked. However, when there were many visitors at home and someone asked her ‘where is daddy?’ she pointed to the nearest male – generalization without requisite discrimination?  Image result for multiple exemplar trainingA mom is not a girl? need for training with multiple examples

4.Rachel, a teenager  could fold her clothes and stack them up in her cupboard. One day, when mom tried to get her to help with folding towels and blankets at home and was surprised that Rachel could not fold blankets

5. Chris had learnt to answer questions about himself when his mom or his therapist asked. However, when was lost briefly in a mall and when people who wanted to help him asked for his parents name and phone numbers, he just sat down crying and was not able to answer questions about himself.

While it may not be possible to discuss this vast topic of generalization a look at some of the key principles and strategies behavior analysts use to program for generalization could help. Parents who see their children acquire skills in clinical setting  could focus on immediately generalizing those at home and in community settings. If there is a hurdle in generalization they should discuss it with the Behavior Analyst responsible for programming as they could plan and program for generalization better. Some strategies are discussed below:

a. It begins with target selection. Target only those behaviors and skills that will meet reinforcement in natural communities after the skill is acquired. For example, teaching to sing or play keyboard in a small group setting can generalize all the way to stage performances with potential to contact reinforcement from natural communities throughout life. Conversation skills, Social etiquette, play skills etc. too fall in such a category. A non example – would it be appropriate to teach penmanship to a child who does not read or recognize words yet?.

Image result for useless goals

need for meaningful targets

b. Teach Multiple examples or sufficient examples for every target : For instance if discriminating between clean versus dirty is being taught , multiple examples could be used  – a dirty cloth vs clean cloth, a dirty paper versus clean one, badly stained glass versus clean glass etc., all the time probing to see if generalization has occurred to other novel contexts. Teaching sufficient examples means teaching using as many examples as required until generalization to all possible variations occurs. For example teaching a child to pronounce 5, 6 or 10 words correctly with the “r” sound until he or she is able to pronounce all functional words with ‘r’ correctly.

Multiple examples of sharp:
Image result for sharp items  sharp-items

c. Teaching both context and response variations : To the question “how are you ?”different responses such as ” I am fine”, ” I am good” , ” great”, ” Ok”.. can be taught. Similarly the response “14 years” should be produced by the learner regardless of whether the question was ” How old are you? ” or it was ” whats your age”.

d. Teaching all possible situations – this involves teaching all examples that could covers all possible situations and varying responses – for example , teaching the use of every type of ATM machine in the neighborhood. This may not always be a feasible option, and nor may it be required in most scenarios.

5. Building familiarity in training setting – In the teaching setting it may be useful to introduce features of what will be out there in the natural setting where the skill has to be used. For instance, while teaching shopping skills in a dummy super market set up it may be useful to include shelves, ‘promotional signs, ‘pay here’ signs, trolleys etc., If you are teaching teaching dining with peers in a home setting with eventual goal of eating out in a restaurant, it will be useful to have cutlery, menu card, napkins and perhaps adult attending on the students and taking orders  like waiters would in a restaurant.

6.  Use some elements from teaching setting in generalization setting : For example a student who is used to a point system or a smiley reward system may benefit if the same is used in a generalization setting such as following etiquette rules in a restaurant or making a choice independently from a menu or being engaged appropriately in the back seat in a long journey. Yes, for some time, it may be a good idea to introduce rewards in the real life-generalized setting similar to the ones used during training.

7. Some children on the spectrum who have difficulties with responding consistently correctly to different people or in different locations will benefit from variations in teachers, positions, location of teaching, variety of tones , distractions being present etc.

8. Rule out dependence on inadvertent cues :  If a child performs well with one therapist but not with another, or with parent but not anyone else it is also important to see if the first therapist or parent is providing some subtle cues inadvertently which others do not provide. Behavior Analysts constantly strive to promote independence and will need to critically examine and completely fade out dependence on any type of prompts that may have emerged during training.

There are many other specific strategies but the above should provide an insight into some of the guiding principles for successful generalization. Much can be achieved by planning for generalization, conducting generalization probes before , during and after training on any skill ( “will he play the keyboard equally well in front of a small group of strangers? “, ” Will he whack the ball to the boundary line when playing in a larger field?”…) and planning and teaching taking into account variations in contexts and responses. Discrimination and generalization go hand in hand and training one would also require training on the other. That is a topic for another day.

Do feel free to send your questions via the comment window or by filling out the form here:

Article Review highlights – Evaluation of HBOT Therapy

Some of what I have written in this review is technical – If you are interested in highlights you could check the intro and conclusion section directly

Some excerpts  from my scientific article review
Using behavior analysis to examine the outcomes of unproven therapies: An examination of hyperbaric oxygen therapy

Lerman, D. C., Sansbury, T., Hovanetz, A., Wolever, E., Garcia, A., O’Brien, E., & Adedipe, H. (2008). Using behavior analysis to examine the outcomes of unproven therapies: An examination of hyperbaric oxygen therapy. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1, 50–58.

Introduction

Behavior Analysts are often confronted with a situation where parents of children with autism or other learning disabilities turn to other unproven, untested interventions ( also referred to as science fads, pseudo-scientific interventions etc.) in their search for improvement in their child’s rate of skill acquisition , reduction in inappropriate or challenging behaviors etc. Chelation therapy, vitamin doses, dietary restrictions etc. are some such examples. The BACB guidelines for responsible conduct enjoin Behavior analysts to study, appraise and review the likely effects of alternative treatments including those provided by other disciplines. The authors of this study have accordingly evaluated the effectiveness of Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy – HBOT , a treatment that, while being expensive also has been gaining attention of parents of children with disabilities. Some parents have claimed that the therapy offers improvements in socialization, language, attending and compliance along with reductions in stereotypic behavior, aggression, disruption, self-injury etc. within 20 weeks. In keeping with the requirement not to turn a blind-eye but to scientifically and objectively evaluate alternate treatments or interventions, the authors have conducted this study.
The authors aim to validate their hypothesis that hyperbaric oxygen therapy does not offer any benefit beyond those offered by ongoing behavior analytic services and also lay down the procedures and challenges in conducting a behavior analytic intervention on unproven therapies.
Methods:
Particpants:
A 7year old girl and two 6 year old boys with 8months, 3.5 years and 4.5 years history of receiving behavior interventions were chosen for the study ( as the study proposes to determine if the alternative intervention can provide more benefits than ongoing behavior interventions).
Further parents of these children had requested HBOT therapy.

The setting for ongoing behavioral services was a private clinic providing behavioral services in 1:1 format as well as in small group formats. The education covered academics, communication, peer interaction, self-care and play. The HBOT therapy sessions were provided in a chamber with 88% oxygen at 1.3 ata sold for in-house use. The chamber dimensions when fully inflated were 233 cm length x 11 cm width and 86 cm diameter.

Dependent variables – Behaviors measured:
Improvements with the therapy are claimed to be in language, task engagement, compliance, socialization, as well as decreases in inappropriate behaviors. The authors used very specific and measurable behaviors as dependent variables in the study. For example, in the area of communication, spontaneous communication, defined as signs or words emitted without prompts was measured (number of occurrences per session). Task engagement was measured as exhibiting targeted response within 5 seconds of instruction with gaze directed at task materials or therapist. Problem behaviors such as hitting, throwing materials were measured in terms of responses per minute as the authors state that each such response had a discrete beginning and ending.

The intervention involved 40-60 minute HBOT sessions administered in the chamber described above upto a maximum of 40 dives per participant. Considerations in setting limits involved providing claimed minimum threshold exposures and minimizing exposure to the unproven therapy. Acclimatization procedures were used initially followed by 60 min sessions with the chamber activated to provide oxygen in specified concentration and with the child present with access to favorite toys, books etc. throughout. If for any reason the child did not get a full 60 minute exposure, the session was excluded from the study. A therapist recorded data for each dive in terms of start time, end time, pressurization start, time when full pressurization was reached and total time at full pressurization. These could be noted from the gauges in the equipment. While the authors describe the HBOT therapy implementation in detail, they have not done an independent evaluation of the accuracy of treatment procedure implementation (treatment integrity).

To study the effect on outcomes therapists videotaped 10 minute sessions  and recorded  data on spontaneous communication, task engagement and inappropriate behaviors. Handheld computers, or desktop pcs and instant data software were used for scoring the above from video tapes.
Further baseline (pre-treatment) sessions data has also been recorded for control purposes.

Results:
Two of the children showed increasing trends in task engagement in the baseline phases capturing the effect of ongoing behavioral interventions on the dependent variables. HBOT therapy did not change the level, trend or variability. For the third child while the levels of task engagement were variable throughout the baseline phase, the gradual increase continued during and after HBOT therapy again suggesting that HBOT therapy by itself did not contribute to any additional beneficial effects. A confound was identified as increase in prompt levels coinciding with withdrawal of HBOT therapy and this was addressed by rescoring to ascertain the level of increase in prompts and its effect on increased task engagement.
Similarly, for problem behaviors, with two of the children decrease in levels in baseline phase continued during intervention. A slight increase in problem with third child was observed.
Discussions and Conclusions
One firm conclusion that authors reach is that the additional cost of HBOT therapy does not result in concomitant increase in benefits. While discussing limitations, they refer to limited generality as the study involved only 3 participants, the need to evaluate the effects of more intense HBOT treatments with possibly higher concentrations, some non-controlled confounds such as a reduction in instruction time along with increased access to preferred activities during HBOT sessions etc.

References

Lerman, D. C., Sansbury, T., Hovanetz, A., Wolever, E., Garcia, A., O’Brien, E., & Adedipe, H. (2008). Using behavior analysis to examine the outcomes of unproven therapies: An examination of hyperbaric oxygen therapy. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1, 50–58.

Inspect before you respect – Is your Behavior Analyst competent and do they follow their ethical guidelines

October 18, 2014 Leave a comment

This note is written specifically for parents of children who receive interventions based on Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA).A special thanks to my colleagues in the field, Dr. Geetika Agarwal, Ms. Gita Srikanth, Ms. Sheela Rajaram and  Ms. Tasneem Hegde for reviewing the draft and for their valuable feedback. I hope I have been able to do justice to their inputs.

First off : ABA is not a therapy! Rather,  it is science based on which a number of  evidence based interventions have been developed to address socially significant behaviors across the entire human spectrum regardless of age, abilities or challenge.

Would you consent to have yourself treated by a person who has learnt medicine by working in a pharmacy? You should ensure that the person has studied medicine formally, keeps up to date with research in his field and conducts himself according to certain ethical guidelines. Unquestioningly and blindly trusting “experts” and “specialists” is not the way to go and this applies especially to people with whom you trust your children with learning challenges or problem behaviors.

So, when you have decided to give your child the benefit of interventions based on the science of Applied Behavior Analyst (ABA), one of the first considerations is to find out if the therapist who is going to work with your child is guided and supervised closely by a BCBA- D /  BCBA or a BCaBA .  The first two are Board Certified  Behavior Analysts ( Former is Doctoral) and the third is a Assistant Behavior Analyst who in turn needs to be supervised by a BCBA or a BCBA-D. The final responsibility, thus  for your childs programming goals , intervention procedures  and supervision of therapists should be with a BCBA-D or a BCBA.  Once you know the name of the professional, even if they are renowned and famous, see if they are listed in the BACB registry – http://www.bacb.com –> find certificants.

For those in a hurry, let me present some  key questions  to ask  :

1. Is my child in good hands – is a credentialled Behavior Analyst designing and supervising the interventions ?

2. Are the interventions designed to ensure my child/ care giver does not come to harm – are  any risks/ risk mitigation discussed well with me and signed off?

3. Does the Behavior Analyst talk to me in plain english shorn of jargon.  Is he/she able to explain choice of teaching strategies/ interventions to my satisfaction?

4. Does the Behavior Analyst talk to me with data and graphed trends to communicate progress of my child?

5. Does the Behavior analyst respect and  maintain confidentiality  ?

6.  Is the Behavior Analyst a ” good citizen” ? For instance, is he/she  on the right side of the law in his or her dealings?

7. Is the Behavior Analyst on a continuous learning mode – does he/ she attend scientific conferences, present technical papers, disseminate knowledge

For those who would like to dwell a little deeper I’ll aim to elaborate on the above. A Behavior Analyst signs up to high standards of ethical conduct – I will list some of them that have a direct bearing for your child and yourself. You’d need to keep following and watching your behavior analysts behavior and convince yourself that he  or she displays behavior in consonance with these.

1. Do no harm , right to most effective treatment and least intrusive interventions : The primary client for the Behavior Analyst (BA) is the child or the vulnerable person receiving services. Parents / Guardians/ carers /teachers/ relatives  ( called significant others) will be secondary clients.  It is the BA’s responsibility to ensure that risks of any potential harm due to interventions are carefully analyzed, discussed with the client or significant others with risk management plans in place. Interventions covering these should be signed off in writing  with significant others to avoid any misunderstanding.

This also means, for example that in the event of your relocation or transition of services, the Behavior Analyst makes appropriate referrals and communicates status assessments to future provider to ensure the child does not suffer. Similar considerations should be seen if for some personal reason the BA is not able to continue providing services – they need to ensure presentation of suitable referrals where possible, a reasonable notice period , exit reports etc. Any information they share with third parties should be with your written consent.

2. Should maintain high standards of integrity in their personal lives and are seen as upstanding citizens . Even if they are clinically brilliant, they need to be operating on the right side of law. If you have any reasons to suspect this, stay away and consider reporting to the Behavior Analyst Certification Board ( http://www.BACB.com ).

2. Keeps up with scientific knowledge : Does the BA attend conferences/ seminars on behavior analysis, is seen making efforts to use the lastest technological advances in the field?

3. Talks to you in plain english : Behavior analysts have an obligation to explain their intervention, assessments etc. in plain English for clients, consumers and professionals from outside the field.  If there is heavy jargon in their talk thats not intelligible to you , watch out! You could be dealing with style provider than substance.

4. Recommends the most effective evidence based interventions : There are a number of effective evidence based procedures such as Antecedent intervention,Joint attention intervention,Precision teaching, modeling, peer training package, schedules, self management etc.  that are based on Applied Behavior Analysis.   The BA, while discussing interventions for your child, should be able to substantiate their choice referring to scientific evidence base (e.g. number of scientific studies published in peer reviewed journals). If you are proposing a non- behavioral intervention, they could use scientific behavioral methods to evaluate its effectiveness.

5. Assesses, measures and communicates with data : Rather than say that they have been very successful, the BA should be able to discuss progress with data and  graphs of progress pre and post intervention. Do you see the BA constantly assessing progress and making changes on the basis of data ?

6. Takes informed consent :  Knowledge derived from interventions  with your child could be useful in  helping others facing similar challenges and add to the scientific knowledge base. In certain contexts the BA will take your permission in writing with a clause that such permission may be withdrawn by you at a later date.   The typical contexts include consent for use of videos data from interventions with your child in scientific conferences/ training programs/ website,  for including your child as a participant in a scientific study ( even if it benefits your child )  which may be published in a scientific journal and for taking up an intervention that involves reduction in socially inappropriate behavior .  It is  important for you to give the informed consent without any feeling of ‘pressure’  such as a fear that your child’s intervention may be compromised if you withold consent.

7. Confidentiality : The ethical Behavior Analyst will share information about your child only with personnel directly involved in designing and providing interventions .  Information Specifically identifying children are  masked ( unless significant others have consented otherwise) when information needs to be shared with peers or the larger community of Behavior Analysts such as in journal articles, technical paper presentations etc.

8. BA’s responsibility to the field of Behavior Analysis : You may ask, how does this concern me as a parent or recipient of services for my child . However, if the BA is seen disseminating knowledge about the field in various fora, seen fighting mis-representation of the field by non-qualified personnel , is seen attending, presenting posters and papers in national and international conferences you are probably seeing a ethical Behavior Analyst.

9. No Dual relationships or conflicts of interest please :  Behavior Analysts relationships with their clients and their significant others is strictly professional in nature and guided by a written contract. Behavior Analysts becoming best friends, joining you in family holidays, accepting gifts etc., would be in violation of their code of conduct as services to the client could be compromised.

These are but a few important points and some yardsticks lay people can evaluate the Behavior Analyst on.  It may be uncomfortable to do such an evaluation as  blind faith is a lot easier. However, with your child’s interests at stake I’d recommend nothing less than a diligent and ongoing evaluation.

Beofre I close, I must say that there are a number of changes you may have to undergo to make the most of your Behavior Analysts services – yes, it is a two way street.  Behavior Analysts prefer to address matters with data and trends and will need your buy in for the interventions with reasonable modifications . They may nor promise or guarantee miracle results but are likely to share information on interventions that have an evidence base and promise on going monitoring with data to demonstrate improvements. They are more likely to concerned with an improvement from here on rather than on an impractical standard thats out there. A Behavior Analyst may not entertain long discussions involving emotional reasons or hypothetical constructs ( invisible reasons that purport to explain the cause of problem but actually do not – see an early blog of mine on mentalism and circular reasoning) but will in a scientific way be able to draw your attention to the real function of problem behavior ( what does the behavior get as a consequence that makes it relevant) and the socially acceptable interventions that should work. This approach would aim to build trust based on objective evaluation of your child’s progress rather than ‘faith’ and this could be a subject matter for another blog!

 

%d bloggers like this: