Abstract
The present study examined the content of applied behavior analytic therapy (ABA therapy) on skill acquisition and intelligence test scores of twenty-eight children with autism and related disabilities. Using a randomized controlled trial, we compared (a) traditional ABA consisting of verbal behavior techniques developed by Skinner (Verbal behavior, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, 1957), (b) comprehensive ABA which added techniques post-Skinner’s theory of language, and (c) waitlist control. Results obtained indicated that even though skill acquisition improved equally across both intervention groups compared to the control, highest intelligence score changes were shown for participants in the comprehensive ABA group (F: 2, 24 = 9.198, p = 0.001). With increasing emphasis on client outcomes, the present data suggest that when hours of intervention are kept constant, ABA service providers may be at an advantage by incorporating techniques that are typically considered beyond the traditional ABA ideas of Skinner’s account of language development.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Change history
22 November 2019
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-019-09350-9
Notes
The one participant eliminated from the comprehensive intervention group due to significant deviation demonstrated a change score of + 61 points from pre- to posttest IQ. Although no errors in administration were discovered, and no problem behavior was observed at either test administration, this participant’s data were removed to force an underestimated mean of treatment effect in the statistical analyses.
References
Alessi, G. (1987). Generative strategies and teaching for generalization. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 5, 15–27.
Arntzen, E., & Almas, I. K. (2002). Effects of mand-tact versus tact-only training on the acquisition of tacts. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 419–422.
Baer, R. A., & Detrich, R. (1990). Tacting and manding in correspondence training: Effects of child selection on verbalization. Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 54, 23–30.
Baio, J., Wiggins, L., Christensen, D. L., Maenner, M. J., Daniels, J., Warren, Z., et al. (2018). Prevalence of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 8 years—Autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network, 11 sites, United States, 2014. Surveillance Summaries, 67, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.ss6706a1.
Barnes, D. (1994). Stimulus equivalence and relational frame theory. The Psychological Record, 44, 91–124.
Barnes-Holmes, Y., Kavanagh, D., & Murphy, C. (2016). Relational frame theory: Implications for education and developmental disabilities. In R. D. Zettle, S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, & A. Biglan (Eds.), Wiley handbook of contextual behavioral science (1st ed., pp. 227–253). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Belisle, J., Dixon, M. R., Stanley, C. R., Munoz, B., & Daar, J. H. (2016). Teaching foundational perspective-taking skills to children with autism using the PEAK-T curriculum: Single-reversal “I-You” deictic frames. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49(4), 965–969.
Bourret, J., Vollmer, T. R., & Rapp, J. T. (2004). Evaluation of vocal mand assessment and vocal mand training procedures. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37, 129–144.
Carr, D., Wilkinson, K. M., Blackman, D., & McIlvane, W. J. (2000). Equivalence classes in individuals with minimal verbal repertoires. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74, 101–115.
Cassidy, S., Roche, B., Colbert, D., Stewart, I., & Grey, I. M. (2016). A relational frame skills training intervention to increase general intelligence and scholastic aptitude. Learning and Individual Differences, 47, 222–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.03.001.
Cassidy, S., Roche, B., & Hayes, S. C. (2011). A relational frame training intervention to raise intelligence quotients: A pilot study. The Psychological Record, 61, 173–198.
Cassidy, S., Roche, B., & O’Hora, D. (2010). Relational frame theory and human intelligence. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 11(1), 37–51.
Cohen, H., Amerine-Dickens, M., & Smith, T. (2006). Early intensive behavioral treatment: Replication of the UCLA model in a community setting. Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 27(2), 145–155.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Routledge Academic.
Colbert, D., Dobutowitsch, M., Roche, B., & Brophy, C. (2017). The proxy-measurement of intelligence quotients using relational skills abilities index. Learning and Individual Differences, 57, 114–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.03.010.
Colbert, D., Tyndall, I., Roche, B., & Cassidy, S. (2018). Can SMART training really increase intelligence? A replication study. Journal of Behavioral Education, 27(1), 509–531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-018-9302-2.
Dawson, G. (2011). Behavioral interventions in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: A review of recent findings. Current Opinion in Pediatrics, 23, 616–620.
Dawson, G., Rogers, S., Munson, J., Smith, M., Winter, J., Greenson, J., et al. (2010). Randomized, controlled trial of an intervention of toddlers with autism: The Early Start Denver Model. Pediatrics, 125(1), 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2009-0958.
Dixon, M. R. (2014a). PEAK relational training system—Direct training module. Carbondale, IL: Shawnee Scientific Press.
Dixon, M. R. (2014b). PEAK relational training system—Generalization module. Carbondale, IL: Shawnee Scientific Press.
Dixon, M. R. (2015). PEAK relational training system—Equivalence module. Carbondale, IL: Shawnee Scientific Press.
Dixon, M. R. (2016). PEAK relational training system—Transformation module. Carbondale, IL: Shawnee Scientific Press.
Dixon, M. R., Belisle, J., Munoz, B. E., Stanley, C. R., & Rowsey, K. (2017). Teaching metaphorical extensions of private events through rival-model observation to children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 50(4), 744–749.
Dixon, M. R., Belisle, J., Stanley, C. R., Rowsey, K. E., Daar, J. H., & Szekely, S. (2015). Toward a behavior analysis of complex language for children with autism: Evaluating the relationship between PEAK and the VB-MAPP. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 27(2), 223–233.
Dixon, M. R., Belisle, J., Stanley, C. R., Speelman, R. C., Rowsey, K. E., Kime, D., et al. (2016). Establishing derived categorical responding in children with disabilities using the PEAK-E curriculum. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 50(1), 134–145.
Dixon, M. R., Whiting, S., Rowsey, K. E., & Belisle, J. (2014). Assessing the relationship between intelligence and the PEAK relational training system. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 8(9), 1208–1213.
Dymond, S., & Alonso-Alvarez, B. (2010). The selective impact of Skinner’s Verbal Behavior on empirical research: A reply to Schlinger (2008). The Psychological Record, 60, 355–360.
Dymond, S., & Rehfeldt, R. A. (2000). Understanding complex behavior: The transformation of stimulus function. The Behavior Analyst, 23(2), 239–254.
Eikeseth, S., Smith, T., Jahr, E., & Eldevik, S. (2002). Intensive behavioral treatment at school for 4- to 7-year-old children with autism. A 1-year comparison controlled study. Behavioral Modification, 26(1), 49–68.
Eikeseth, S., Smith, T., Jahr, E., & Eldevik, S. (2007). Outcome for children with autism who began intensive behavioral treatment between ages 4 and 7: A comparison controlled study. Behavior Modification, 31(3), 264–278.
Giofre, D., Borella, E., & Mammarella, I. C. (2017). The relationship between intelligence, working memory, academic self-esteem, and academic achievement. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 29, 731–747. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2017.1310110.
Gresham, F. M., & Witt, J. C. (1997). Utility of intelligence tests for treatment planning, classification, and placement decisions: Recent empirical findings and future directions. School Psychology Quarterly, 12(3), 249–267. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0088961.
Hayes, J., & Stewart, I. (2016). Comparing the effects of derived relational training and computer coding on intellectual potential in school-age children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 397–411.
Hayes, S. C. (2018). ACT randomized controlled trials since 1986. Retrieved May 10, 2019, from https://contextualscience.org/ACT_Randomized_Controlled_Trials.
Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Plenum.
Healy, O., Barnes‐Holmes, D., & Smeets, P. M. (2000). Derived relational responding as generalized operant behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74(2), 207–227.
Keith, T. Z., Fehrmann, P., Harrison, P. L., & Pottebaum, S. M. (1987). The relation between adaptive behavior and intelligence: Testing alternative explanations. Journal of School Psychology, 25(1), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4405(87)90058-6.
Landa, R. J., & Kalb, L. G. (2012). Long-term outcomes of toddlers with autism spectrum disorder exposure to short-term intervention. Pediatrics, 130, 186.
Lovaas, O. (1987). Behavioral treatment and normal educational and intellectual functioning in young autistic children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55(1), 3–9.
McEachin, J. J., Smith, T., & Lovaas, O. (1993). Long-term outcome for children with autism who received early intensive behavioral treatment. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 97(4), 359–372.
McKeel, A., & Matas, J. (2017). Utilizing PEAK relational training system to teach visual, gustatory, and auditory relations to adults with developmental disabilities. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10(3), 252–260.
McKeel, A. N., Dixon, M. R., Daar, J. H., Rowsey, K. E., & Szekely, S. (2015). Evaluating the efficacy of the PEAK relational training system using a randomized controlled trial of children with autism. Journal of Behavioral Education, 24(2), 230–241.
Meyers, C. E., Nihira, K., & Zetlin, A. (1979). The measurement of adaptive behavior. In N. R. Ellis (Ed.), Handbook of mental deficiency: Psychological theory and research (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Mullen, S., Dixon, M. R., Belisle, J., & Stanley, C. R. (2017). Establishing auditory-tactile-visual equivalence classes in children with autism and developmental delays. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 33(2), 283–289.
Murphy, C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Barnes-Holmes, Y. (2005). Derived manding in children with autism: Synthesizing Skinner’s verbal behavior with relational frame theory. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38(4), 445–462.
O’Hora, D., Palaez, M., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2005). Derived relational responding and performance on verbal sub-tests of the WAIS-III. The Psychological Record, 55, 155–175.
O’Hora, D., Palaez, M., Barnes-Holmes, D., Rae, G., Robinson, K., & Chaudary, T. (2008). Temporal relations and intelligence: Correlating relational performance and performance on the WAIS-III. The Psychological Record, 58, 569–584.
O’Toole, C., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2009). Three chronometric indices of relational responding as predictors of performance on a brief intelligence test: The importance of relational flexibility. The Psychological Record, 59, 119–132.
Rehfeldt, R., Dillen, J. E., Ziomek, M. M., & Kowalchuk, R. K. (2007). Assessing relational learning deficits in perspective-taking in children with high functioning autism spectrum disorder. The Psychological Record, 57, 23–47.
Rehfeldt, R. A., & Root, S. L. (2005). Establishing derived requesting skills in adults with severe developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38, 101–105.
Reichow, B., & Wolery, M. (2009). Comprehensive synthesis of early intensive behavioral interventions for young children with autism based on the UCLA young autism project model. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 39(1), 23–41.
Roane, H. S., Fisher, W. W., & Carr, J. E. (2016). Applied behavior analysis as treatment for autism spectrum disorder. The Journal of Pediatrics, 175, 27–32.
Rosales, R., & Rehfeldt, R. A. (2007). Contriving transitive conditioned establishing operations to establish derived manding skills in adults with severe developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40(1), 105–121.
Rowsey, K. E., Belisle, J., & Dixon, M. R. (2015). Principal component analysis of the PEAK relational training system. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 27(1), 15–23.
Rowsey, K. E., Belisle, J., Stanley, C. R., Daar, J. H., & Dixon, M. R. (2017). Principal component analysis of the PEAK Generalization Module. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 29(3), 489–501.
Sallows, G. O., & Graupner, T. D. (2005). Intensive behavioral treatment for children with autism: Four-year outcome and predictors. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 110(6), 417–438.
Sattler, J. M., Dumont, R., & Coalson, D. L. (2016). Assessment of children: WISC-V and WPPSI-IV. San Diego: Jerome M. Sattler, Publisher.
Sautter, R. A., & LeBlanc, L. A. (2006). Empirical applications of Skinner’s analysis of verbal behavior with humans. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 22, 35–48.
Schriebman, L. (2000). Intensive behavioral/psychoeducational treatments for autism: Research needs and future directions. Journal of Autism and Hearing Research, 14, 5–13.
Sigafoos, J., Doss, S., & Reichle, J. (1989). Developing mand and tat repertoires in persons with severe developmental disabilities using graphic symbols. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 10, 183–200.
Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Smith, T., Eikeseth, S., Klevstrand, M., & Lovaas, O. I. (1997). Intensive behavioral treatment for preschoolers with severe mental retardation and pervasive developmental disorder. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 102(3), 238–249.
Sternberg, R. J. (1997). The concept of intelligence and its role in lifelong learning and success. American Psychologist, 52(10), 1030–1037.
Sturmey, P. (2002). Mental retardation and concurrent psychiatric disorder: Assessment and treatment. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 15, 489–495.
Weschler, D. (2012). Weschler preschool and primary scale of intelligence (4th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
Weschler, D. (2014). Weschler intelligence scale for children (5th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
First author receives small royalties from sales of the PEAK curriculum. Remaining authors declare they have no conflict of interest.
Informed Consent
Informed consent and assent were obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Human and Animal Rights
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Appendix
Therapist: | Rater 1: | Rater 2: | Date: | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Preparation checklist | ||||||
Instructions: For each item, evaluate if the therapist has met expectations as outlined in the item description. A score of 0 suggests that the therapist has not met expectations and is reserved for when the therapist fails to complete the step entirely. A score of 1 suggests that the therapist has completed the item; however, greater performance is expected. A score of 2 suggests that the therapist has met expectations for the given item | ||||||
Item | Score | |||||
1. Has determined appropriate stimuli to use as reinforcers using a preference assessment method | 0 | 1 | 2 | |||
2. Has program sheets with appropriate stimuli indicated on the program sheets | 0 | 1 | 2 | |||
3. Has written the date and randomized the stimulus presentation order on the data sheets | 0 | 1 | 2 | |||
4. Has arranged the environment in a way that minimizes distractions to conduct training | 0 | 1 | 2 | |||
5. Has all necessary stimuli, as specified in the participant’s program, to conduct training | 0 | 1 | 2 | |||
Total score | /10 | |||||
Percentage score | /100% | |||||
Implementation checklist | ||||||
Instructions: The implementation checklist is designed to evaluate implementation fidelity for any number of consecutive trials. We recommend that at least five trials be evaluated. For each trial, provide a tally indicating whether the step was completed correctly or incorrectly. Note that, for each trial, a step can only be performed either correctly or incorrectly, and the total number of tally marks for each step (i.e., correct + incorrect) should equal the number of trials that have been assessed. Also, only a single tally mark may appear in steps 3 and 4 for each trial as these items are incompatible with one another (i.e., the participant either demonstrates the correct response or an incorrect response) | ||||||
Train trials | Test trials | |||||
Step | Correct? | Incorrect? | Step | Correct? | Incorrect? | |
1. Clearly presents the discriminative stimulus | 1. Clearly presents the discriminative stimulus | |||||
2. Allows appropriate time for participant response | 2. Allows appropriate time for participant response | |||||
3. If participant response is correct, provides reinforcement | 3. Does not provide reinforcement when participant response is correct | |||||
4. If participant is incorrect, provides appropriate prompt | 4. Does not provide prompt when participant response is incorrect | |||||
5. Quickly progresses to the next trial | 5. Quickly progresses to the next trial | |||||
Total | Total | |||||
Percentage correct (Train + Test) | Notes | |||||
Preparation fidelity: (percentage score preparation checklist) | ||||||
Implementation Fidelity: (percentage correct implementation checklist) | ||||||
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dixon, M.R., Paliliunas, D., Barron, B.F. et al. Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluation of ABA Content on IQ Gains in Children with Autism. J Behav Educ 30, 455–477 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-019-09344-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-019-09344-7