Back in 2003, Morton Gernsbacher published an interesting
article
that took applied behavior analysis (ABA) advocates to task for claiming that
ABA is ‘scientifically proven.’ This
upset some folks in the ABA community. I liked it.
It’s true that ABA
studies have methodology limitations, like all studies of anything. It was true when he wrote that there was
less replication of these studies than there should have been. That’s less true now, but more replication
would still be good. The standard for
scientific proof is very high. As advocates of science, advocates of ABA
should take that standard seriously and talk about proof carefully.
What we can say with confidence is that ABA has
the most evidence of effectiveness as an autism intervention. There is no near competitor. But how much is ‘the most?’ Gernsbacher says “It is to the great credit
of ABA proponents that they have consistently sought to provide scientific
evidence of the efficacy of their treatment.”
How much evidence amounts to ‘consistently?’