Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

, Volume 40, Issue 1, pp 74–88 | Cite as

ABA Versus TEACCH: The Case for Defining and Validating Comprehensive Treatment Models in Autism

  • Kevin Callahan
  • Smita Shukla-MehtaEmail author
  • Sandy Magee
  • Min Wie
Original Paper


The authors analyzed the results of a social validation survey to determine if autism service providers including special education teachers, parents, and administrators demonstrate a preference for the intervention components of Applied Behavior Analysis or Training and Education of Autistic and other Communication Handicapped Children. They also investigated the comprehensiveness of these treatment models for use in public school programs. The findings indicate no clear preference for either model, but a significantly higher level of social validity for components inherent in both approaches. The authors discuss the need for research to define what is meant by comprehensive programming in autism.


Social validation Expert validation ABA vs. TEACCH Autism treatment model 



We wish to thank Julie Ray and Stacey Callaway, UNT Project STARS autism research and leadership doctoral program, for their assistance in data collection and analysis and identifying subject matter experts. We also thank Kristin Farmer, Autism Comprehensive Education Services, Inc., California, for her assistance with the expert validation process.


  1. Alberto, P. A., & Troutman, A. C. (2008). Applied behavior analysis for teachers (8th ed.). Columbus, OH: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Arick, J. R., Krug, D. A., Fullerton, A., Loos, L., & Falco, R. (2005). School-based programs. In F. R. Volkmar, R. Paul, A. Klin, & D. Cohen (Eds.), Handbook of autism and pervasive developmental disorders (pp. 1003–1028). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  3. Callahan, K., Henson, R. K., & Cowan, A. K. (2008). Social validation of evidence-based practices in autism by parents, teachers, and administrators. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 678–692.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Choutka, C. M., Doloughty, P. T., & Zirkel, P. A. (2004). The “discrete trials” of Applied Behavior Analysis for children with autism: Outcome-related factors in the case law. Journal of Special Education, 38, 95–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Eikeseth, S. (2009). Outcomes of comprehensive psycho-educational interventions for young children with autism. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30, 158–178.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Eldevik, S., Eikeseth, S., Jahr, E., & Smith, T. (2006). Effects of low-intensity behavioral treatment for children with autism and mental retardation. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36, 211–224.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Foster, S. L., & Mash, E. J. (1999). Assessing social validity in clinical treatment research: Issues and procedures. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 308–319.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Francis, K. (2005). Autism interventions: A critical update. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 47, 493–499.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Gresham, F. M., Beebe-Frankenberger, M. E., & MacMillan, D. L. (1999). A selective review of treatments for children with autism: Description and methodological considerations. School Psychology Review, 28, 559–575.Google Scholar
  10. Gresham, F. M., Cook, C. R., Crews, S. D., & Kern, L. (2004). Social skills training for children and youth with emotional and behavioral disorders: Validity considerations and future directions. Behavioral Disorders, 30, 32–46.Google Scholar
  11. Hess, K. L., Morrier, M. J., Heflin, L. J., & Ivey, M. L. (2008). Autism treatment survey: Services received by children with Autism Spectrum Disorders in public school classrooms. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 961–971.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Horner, R. H., & Carr, E. G. (1997). Behavioral support for students with severe disabilities: Functional assessment and comprehensive intervention. The Journal of Special Education, 31, 84–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, A., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 165–179.Google Scholar
  14. Howard, J. S., Sparkman, C. R., Cohen, H. G., Green, G., & Stanislaw, H. (2005). A comparison of intensive behavior analytic and eclectic treatments for young children with autism. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 26, 359–383.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Howlin, P. (2005). The effectiveness of interventions for children with autism. Neurodevelopmental Disorders (pp. 101–119). Vienna: Springer.Google Scholar
  16. Humphrey, N., & Parkinson, G. (2006). Research on interventions for children and young people on the autistic spectrum: A critical perspective. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 6(2), 76–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. INSAR. (2008). Our vision for autism research. Autism Research, 1, 71–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kazdin, A. E. (1977). Assessing the clinical or applied significance of behavior change through social validation. Behavior Modification, 1, 427–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kazdin, A. E. (1981). Acceptability of child treatment techniques: The influences of treatment efficacy and adverse side effects. Behavior Therapy, 12, 493–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kern, L., & Manz, P. (2004). A look at current validity issues of school-wide behavior support. Behavioral Disorders, 30, 47–59.Google Scholar
  21. Lord, C., Wagner, A., Rogers, S., Szatmari, P., Aman, M., Charman, T., et al. (2005). Challenges in evaluating psychosocial interventions for autistic spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 35, 695–707.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Lovaas, O. I. (1987). Behavioral treatment and normal educational and intellectual functioning in young autistic children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 3–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Maurice, C., Green, G., & Luce, S. C. (Eds.). (1996). Behavioral intervention for young children with autism: A manual for parents and professionals. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
  24. Mesibov, G. (2001). Interview with Professor Gary Mesibov. Looking Up: The Monthly International Autism Newsletter, 2(10). Retrieved from
  25. Mesibov, G. B., Shea, V., & Schopler, E. (2006). The TEACCH approach to autism spectrum disorders. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. National Research Council. (2001). Educating children with autism. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  27. Odom, S., Boyd, B., Hall, L., & Hume, K. (2008). Meta-evaluation of comprehensive treatment programs for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Paper presented at the 4th annual international meeting for Autism research, London, England.Google Scholar
  28. Odom, S. L., Brown, W. H., Frey, T., Karasu, N., Smith-Canter, L. L., & Strain, P. S. (2003). Evidence-based practices for young children with autism: Contributions for single-subject design research. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 18, 166–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Reichow, B., Volkmar, F. R., & Cicchetti, D. V. (2008). Development of the evaluative method for evaluating and determining evidence-based practices in autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 1311–1319.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Rimland, B. (1999). The ABA controversy. Autism Research Review International, 13(3), 3. Retrieved from
  31. Rogers, S. J. (1998). Empirically supported comprehensive treatments for young children with autism. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 27, 168–179.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Schoen, A. A. (2003). What potential does the Applied Behavior Analysis approach have for the treatment of children and youth with autism? Journal of Instructional Psychology, 30, 125–129.Google Scholar
  33. Schopler, E., Reichler, R. J., & Lansing, M. (1980). Individualized assessment and treatment for autistic and developmentally disabled children. Volume II. Teaching strategies of parents and professionals. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.Google Scholar
  34. Slavin, R. E. (2008). Perspectives on evidence-based research in education. What works? Issues in synthesizing educational program evaluations. Educational Researcher, 37(1), 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Smith, T., Scahill, L., Dawson, G., Guthrie, D., Lord, C., Odom, S., et al. (2007). Designing research studies on psychosocial interventions in autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37, 354–366.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Wilczynski, S. M. (2007, March). The National Standards Project: Using evidence-based practice to create environments in which individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders can succeed. Paper presented at the 4th international conference on positive behavior support, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  37. Wolf, M. M. (1978). Social validity: The case for subjective measurement or how applied behavior analysis is finding its heart. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 203–214.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Yell, M. L., Drasgow, E., & Lowery, K. A. (2005). No Child Left Behind and students with autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 20, 130–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Yell, M. L., Katsiyannis, A., & Shiner, J. G. (2006). The No Child Left Behind Act, adequate yearly progress, and students with disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(4), 32–39.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kevin Callahan
    • 1
  • Smita Shukla-Mehta
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sandy Magee
    • 2
  • Min Wie
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Educational PsychologyUniversity of North TexasDentonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Behavior AnalysisUniversity of North TexasDentonUSA

Personalised recommendations