Advertisement

The Analysis of Verbal Behavior

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 45–47 | Cite as

Commentary on Drash and Tudor: An Analysis of Autism as a Contingency-Shaped Disorder of Verbal Behavior

  • Raymond G. Romanczyk
  • Jennifer M. Gillis
Article

Abstract

A critique is presented of the etiological model for autism as presented by Drash and Tudor. The model is rejected based upon conceptual and methodological grounds. The major points raised concern overgeneralization of research findings, limitations of single subject methodology to answer population based questions, current neurobiological research, and the danger of uni-dimensional models. Specific examples of cases that do not fit Drash and Tudor model are presented.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Gillberg, C. (2000). The Biology of the Autistic Syndromes (3rd ed.) Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. New York State Department of Health Clinical Practice Guideline: The Guideline Technical Report. Autism/Pervasive Developmental Disorders, Assessment, andIntervention for Young Children (Age 0-3 Years). Publication No. 4217. New York State Department of Health, 1999.Google Scholar
  3. Rodier, P. M. (2000, February). The Early Origins of Autism, Scientific American, 282 (2), 56–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Romanczyk, R. G., Arnstein, L., Soorya, L., & Gillis, J. (2002). The Myriad of Controversial Treatments for Autism: ACritical Evaluation of Efficacy. In Lilienfeld, Lohr, and Lynn (Eds.), Science andPseu-doscience in Contemporary Clinical Psychology. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  5. Woolf, S. H. (1991) AHCPR Interim Manual for Clinical Practice Guideline Development. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (AHCPR Publication No. 91-0018).Google Scholar
  6. Woolf, S. H. (1994). An organized analytic framework for practice guideline development: Using the analytic logic as a guide for reviewing evidence, developing recommendations, and explaining the rationale. In McCormick, K. A., Moore, S. R., & Siegel, R. A. (Eds.), Clinical Practice Guideline Development: Methodology Perspectives. Rockville, M.D: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (AHCPR Publication No. 95-0009).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Behavior Analysis International 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Child DevelopmentState University of New York at BinghamtonBinghamtonUSA

Personalised recommendations