A Comment on Drash and Tudor’s (2004) Operant Theory of Autism
- 4 Downloads
The authors comment on Drash and Tudor’s operant theory of autism. Concerns with the theory’s face validity and empirical support are presented, along with concerns about four aspects of the theory.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
- Bettelheim, B. (1967). The emptyfortress: Infantile autism and the birth of the self. Oxford: Free Press of Glencoe.Google Scholar
- Bijou, S. W., & Ghezzi, P. M. (1999). The behavior interference theory of autistic behavior in young children. In P. M. Ghezzi, W. L. Williams, & J. E. Carr (Eds.), Autism: Behavior analytic perspectives (pp. 33–43). Reno, NV: Context Press.Google Scholar
- Harshman, E. J. (2003). In reply. Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, 8, 2.Google Scholar
- Iwata, B. A., Roscoe, E. M., Shore, B. A., & Conners, J. (2002, May). Large-scale application of functional analysis methodology across behavior disorders. In B. A. Iwata (Chair), Clinical and procedural extensions of functional analysis methodology. Symposium conducted at the 28th Annual Convention of the Association for Behavior Analysis, Toronto.Google Scholar
- Szatmari, P. (2003). The causes of autism spectrum disorders. British Journal of Psychiatry, 326, 173–174.Google Scholar
© Association of Behavior Analysis International 2004