Social Validity and Teachers’ Use of Evidence-Based Practices for Autism
The autism intervention literature focuses heavily on the concept of evidence-based practice, with less consideration of the acceptability, feasibility, and contextual alignment of interventions in practice. A survey of 130 special educators was conducted to quantify this “social validity” of evidence-based practices and analyze its relationship with knowledge level and frequency of use. Results indicate that knowledge, use, and social validity are tightly-connected and rank the highest for modeling, reinforcement, prompting, and visual supports. Regression analysis suggests that greater knowledge, higher perceived social validity, and a caseload including more students with autism predicts more frequent use of a practice. The results support the vital role that social validity plays in teachers’ implementation, with implications for both research and practice.
KeywordsAutism Social validity Evidence-based practice Special education Intervention
The author thanks Dr. Daniel Riffe, Professor of Media and Journalism at UNC Chapel Hill, for assistance with methodological design, implementation, and participant incentives. Additional acknowledgments provided to Dr. Cathy Zimmer and the consultants at the Odum Institute at UNC Chapel Hill for their statistical consulting services.
JM was the lead researcher and designed the study, collected data, conducted statistical analyses, and drafted and revised the manuscript.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The author declares that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee. IRB #18-2576 was reviewed by the Office of Human Research Ethics and was determined to be exempt from further review according to regulatory category 2, survey, interview, or public observation, under 45 CFR 46.101(b).
- Carter, S. L. (2010). The social validity manual: A guide to subjective evaluation of behavior interventions. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Chafouleas, S. M., Briesch, A. M., Neugebauer, S. R., & Riley-Tillman, T. C. (2011). Usage rating profile—intervention (Revised). Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
- Cook, B. G., & Odom, S. L. (2013). Evidence-based practices and implementation science in special education. Exceptional Children, 79(2), 135–144.Google Scholar
- Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (4th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 165–179.Google Scholar
- Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, (2004) 20 U.S.C. § 1400.Google Scholar
- Joyce, B. R., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
- National Autism Center. (2015). Findings and conclusions: National standards project, phase 2. Randolph, MA: AuthorGoogle Scholar
- No Child Left Behind Act [NCLB], Pub. L. No. 1425 (2002). 115.Google Scholar
- North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. (2019). State summary of public school full-time personnel. http://apps.schools.nc.gov/ords/f?p=145:21:::NO:::.
- Sam, A. M., Cox, A. W., Savage, M. N., Waters, V., & Odom, S. L. (2019). Disseminating information on evidence-based practices for children and youth with autism spectrum disorder: AFIRM. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-03945-x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (2016). IACC/OARC autism research database. https://iacc.hhs.gov/funding/data/. Accessed 20 June 2019.