Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

, Volume 28, Issue 1, pp 5–13 | Cite as

Early Intervention Project: Can Its Claims Be Substantiated and Its Effects Replicated?

  • Frank M. Gresham
  • Donald L. MacMillan

Abstract

A comprehensive report to the National Institute of Health on the diagnosis, etiology, epidemiology, and treatment of autism indicated that early intervention has the potential of being an effective intervention (Bristol et al., 1996). In spite of this positive outlook, several research and methodological questions remain regarding time of treatment initiation, intensity of treatment and duration of treatment, random assignment, comparative treatment designs, and treatment integrity. Against this backdrop we consider the claims made by the Early Intervention Project (EIP; Lovaas, 1987, 1993; McEachin, Smith, & Lovaas, 1993). The EIP claims to produce recovery from autism in 47% of the cases and to greatly reduce its severity in an additional 42% of cases. This article evaluates the EIP against threats to internal and external validity and is found to suffer from a number of methodological problems. Based on rebuttals to criticisms of their program, the EIP authors seem unwilling to admit any methodological flaws in the sampling, design, and analysis of data of the EIP. It is recommended that parents and fair hearing officers adopt an attitude of healthy skepticism before proceeding to an unqualified endorsement of the EIP as a treatment for autism.

Early intervention autism experimental validity recovery 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Alternatives to Lovaas therapy. (1996, October). Early Childhood Report—Bonus Report, pp. 1–4.Google Scholar
  2. American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  3. Bristol, M., Cohen, D., Costello, J., Denckla, M., Eckberg, T., Kallen, R., Kraemer, H., Lord, C., Maurer, R., mcIllvane, W., Minshew, N., Sigman, M., & Spence, A. (1996). State of the science in autism: Report to the National Institutes of Health. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 26, 121–154.Google Scholar
  4. Campbell, M., Schopler, E., Cueva, J., & Hallin, A. (1996). Treatment of autistic disorder. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 35, 134–143.Google Scholar
  5. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  6. Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  7. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
  8. Feinberg, E., & Beyer, J. (1997). Creating public policy in a climate of clinical indeterminacy: Lovaas as the case example of du jour. Infants and Young Children, 10(3).Google Scholar
  9. Gresham, F. M., & MacMillan, D. L. (1997). Autistic recovery?: An analysis and critique of the empirical evidence on the Early Intervention Project. Behavioral Disorders, 22, 185–201.Google Scholar
  10. Gubernick, L., & Conlin, M. (1997, February 10). The special education scandal. Forbes, pp. 66, 69–70.Google Scholar
  11. Guralnick, M. (1995). The effectiveness of early intervention for vulnerable children: A developmental perspective. Keynote address presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of University Affiliated Programs, November 1995, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  12. Kazdin, A. (1993). Replication and extension of behavioral treatment of autistic disorder. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 97, 377–379.Google Scholar
  13. Lord, C., & Schopler, E. (1989). The role of age at assessment, developmental level, and test in the stability of intelligence scores in young autistic children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 19, 483–499.Google Scholar
  14. 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.Google Scholar
  15. Lovaas, O. I. (1993). The development of a treatment-research project for developmentally disabled and autistic children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 617–630.Google Scholar
  16. Lovaas, O. I., Ackerman, A. B., Alexander, D., Firestone, P., Perkins, J., & Young, D. (1980). Teaching developmentally disabled children: The me book. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.Google Scholar
  17. Lovaas, O. I., Smith, T., & McEachin, J. (1989). Clarifying comments on the young autism study: Reply to Schopler, Short, and Mesibov. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 165–167.Google Scholar
  18. McCall, R. (1979). The development of intellectual functioning in infancy and the prediction of later I.Q. In J. D. Osofsky (Ed.), Handbook of infant development (pp. 707–741). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  19. McEachin, J., Smith, T., & Lovaas, O. I. (1993). Long-term outcome for children with autism who received early intensive behavioral treatment. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 97, 359–372.Google Scholar
  20. Mundy, P. (1993). Normal versus high-functioning in children with autism. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 97, 381–384.Google Scholar
  21. Rogers, S. (1996). Brief report: Early intervention in autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 26, 243–246.Google Scholar
  22. Schopler, E., Short, A., & Mesibov, G. (1989). Relation of behavioral treatment to “normal functioning”: Comment on Lovaas. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 162–164.Google Scholar
  23. Smith, T., & Lovaas, O. I. (1997). The UCLA Young Autism Project: A reply to Gresham and MacMillan. Behavioral Disorders, 22, 202–218.Google Scholar
  24. Smith, T., McEachin, J., & Lovaas, O. I. (1993). Comments on replication and evaluation of outcome. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 97, 385–391.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank M. Gresham
    • 1
  • Donald L. MacMillan
    • 2
  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of California–RiversideRiverside
  2. 2.University of California–RiversideRiverside

Personalised recommendations