# data[].attributes.headline
Being a Scientist-Practitioner for Medication Interventions (Nicole Barr)

# data[].attributes.subject
Being a Scientist-Practitioner for Medication Interventions (Nicole Barr)

# data[].attributes.body
Normand (2008) notes that being skeptical is not “doubting the validity of everything….[but] judg[ing] the validity of a claim based on objective empirical evidence” (p. 42). This skill becomes critical when working in the field of applied behaviour analysis (Normand, 2008), specifically with purported treatments that target improving the symptoms of or even curing autism spectrum disorder. One way that Normand (2008) suggests to be a healthy skeptic is to be a scientist-practitioner. A scientist-practitioner must “incorporate rigorous evaluative systems into [their] clinical practice” (p. 46). In cases where the behaviour analyst has done their duty to inform a parent or client of a non-evidence based practice (2.09a Treatment/Intervention Efficacy, Behaviour Analyst Certification Board [BACB], 2017), and the stakeholder would like to implement the practice against recommendation, the analyst must devise a way to systematically evaluate the effect of the practice on the client’s well-being and behaviour analytic services (Normand 2008) in order to minimize harm (Bailey & Burch, 2010; BACB, 2017; Norman, 2008).

In practice, I find that I regularly have to become a scientist-practitioner when parents of client’s make the decision to try medication for a client’s more severe challenging behaviours. In these cases, it is extremely hard to dissuade parents from this course as the side effects of medications tend to have immediate effects on challenging behaviour (i.e., lethargy tends to decrease challenging behaviour), whereas behaviour analytic strategies typically take time to change behaviour. Ultimately, like Normand (2008) suggests, we have to find a way to critically evaluate the application of the medication to a client’s challenging behaviour and progress. This normally includes rigorous information gathering and monitoring. We take baseline prior to medication start, note when medication begins, any changes to the dosage of medication (i.e., increase, decrease, missed due to illness etc.), and changes to type of medication. We do this by maintaining a positive, non-judgmental rapport with the parents so that we can maintain a daily check-in for information (e.g., dosage, appetite, behaviour). These changes are noted on the graphs for both challenging behaviour tracking, behaviour protocols and skills programming. While we cannot comment on the effectiveness of the medication as we are not medical professionals, we can provide the visual displays and comment on the rates of learning and challenging behaviour during every step of the medication intervention so that the parent can make an informed decision on whether to continue with medication when they consult with the medical professional.

References

Bailey, J., & Burch, M. (2016). Ethics for behavior analysts (3rd ed.). New York, NY:

Routledge.

Behavior Analyst Certification Board. (2017). Professional and ethical compliance code for

behavior analysts. Retrieved from http://www.bacb.org

Normand, M. P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(2), 42–49. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF03391727

# data[].attributes.body
I consider my self a healthy skeptic of the research literature. When read from the literature for school or during work I do so in a way to keep an open mind of what evidence exists for that particular intervention. How I will continue to be a healthy skeptic is by asking certain questions to myself such as, What other literature exists on this intervention? How many participants were in the study? Was the study replicated?  These are just some examples of questions I use to critique the literature.

Normand, (20008) talks about keeping update in the literature and he states this by saying "Maintaining contact with peer-reviewed scientific literature is the primary way of keeping abreast of scientific development and controversies (p.46). When we do this we can become better detectors in finding out what actually is maintained as evidence based in the literature.

References
Normand, M.P. (2008) Science, Skepticism, and applied behaviour analysis. Behaviour Analytst in Practice, 1(2), 42-49.

# data[].attributes.body
I enjoyed the reading this week by Normand (2008) and fully agree that it is important to have a healthy sense of skepticism, especially when working with populations, such as those diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), that are offered such a wide variety of treatment options. Many available pseudoscientific treatments can cause harm, and families don’t always have the skills or knowledge for researching what to avoid. It is our job as professionals to help guide our clients towards evidence-based treatments.

One comment that caught my attention was when Normand (2008) wrote “[o]ne should not start with the assumption that a claim cannot be true any more than one should start with the assumption that a claim must be true. All reasonable evidence on both sides must be considered” (p. 42). This reminded me to remain skeptical even of behaviour analytic treatments, in that it is important to stay updated with the literature to ensure that our procedures are still relevant, up to date, and considered effective.

Normand’s (2008) suggestion to read widely is one I intend to continue following. With this program, I don’t feel like I have that much time for extra reading, but eventually I will, and was intrigued by his suggestion to subscribe to publications that critically analyse a wide variety of controversial claims, and to read non-behaviour analytic research that bears on our research and practice. Something I love about this field is the requirement for continuing education, and I look forward to attending workshops on different treatments. Thanks to the skills I’ve acquired in this program, I will also be able to look at research or claims coming from the providers of different treatments, and judge for myself whether I think the research is credible, while of course also looking for other credible sources for this information. Reading widely and attending workshops are definitely ways I’ll continue to be a healthy skeptic.

Liz

Reference

Normand, M.P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(2), 42-49.

# data[].attributes.headline
Skepticism (Louisa Lui)    Reading Normand (2008) and his take on skepticism, I am reminded of the stark contrast between skepticism versus having unquestioning trust about an idea. A close friend of mine has complete trust in information that comes from the internet or word of mouth. I am more cautious and will refrain from choosing a position until I have gathered all the facts and had a chance to process all the information and its sources. Whenever I navigate a conversation to ascertain the legitimacy of my friend’s information and the credibility of her sources, I endeavor to be a healthy skeptic. I embrace a mental “flip-flopping” which Normand (2008) defined as taking a position with caution, and altering it based on sufficient evidence. In considering the evidence, as well as my friend’s perspective, I can objectively discuss the information presented and respond in a non-judgemental and friendly manner using the interpersonal skills as recommended by Bailey and Burch (2010).  Additionally, I will often attempt to influence by friend’s unquestioning trust of other’s ideas and persuade her to consider looking at the information with a little skepticism.I can apply my skills of being a healthy skeptic with my friend, in my own practice by “read[ing] widely” (Normand, 2008, p. 46) by becoming more proficient at “searching the scientific literature for evidence and information before rushing to judgement” (p. 46) about any new idea or claim. Additionally, although I may not be in a position to “promote skeptical research” as Normand (2008, p. 47) recommends at his point. I can promote skepticism with clients and parents to influence their acceptance of new claims using skills of persuasion (Bailey & Burch, 2010). Doing so adheres to the Professional and Ethical Compliance Code of Behavior Analysts (BACB, 2014/2016) to advocate and ensure clients access effective treatments that will not cause the child or parents harm (Normand, 2008). Lastly, I can continue to refer to the evidence by being a “scientific-practitioner…. [by being a] proponent of evidence-based practice and good science” (Normand, 2008, p. 46), and to alter my position on any new claim based on sufficient evidence.ReferencesBailey, J., & Burch, M. (2010). 25 essential skills and strategies for the professional behaviour analyst (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.Behavior Analyst Certification Board. (2014/2016). Professional and Ethical Compliance Code for Behavior Analysts (version 2016). Retrieved from http://bacb.com/ethics-code Normand, M. P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(2), 42-49. doi: 10.1007/BF03391727

# data[].attributes.subject
Skepticism (Louisa Lui)    Reading Normand (2008) and his take on skepticism, I am reminded of the stark contrast between skepticism versus having unquestioning trust about an idea. A close friend of mine has complete trust in information that comes from the internet or word of mouth. I am more cautious and will refrain from choosing a position until I have gathered all the facts and had a chance to process all the information and its sources. Whenever I navigate a conversation to ascertain the legitimacy of my friend’s information and the credibility of her sources, I endeavor to be a healthy skeptic. I embrace a mental “flip-flopping” which Normand (2008) defined as taking a position with caution, and altering it based on sufficient evidence. In considering the evidence, as well as my friend’s perspective, I can objectively discuss the information presented and respond in a non-judgemental and friendly manner using the interpersonal skills as recommended by Bailey and Burch (2010).  Additionally, I will often attempt to influence by friend’s unquestioning trust of other’s ideas and persuade her to consider looking at the information with a little skepticism.I can apply my skills of being a healthy skeptic with my friend, in my own practice by “read[ing] widely” (Normand, 2008, p. 46) by becoming more proficient at “searching the scientific literature for evidence and information before rushing to judgement” (p. 46) about any new idea or claim. Additionally, although I may not be in a position to “promote skeptical research” as Normand (2008, p. 47) recommends at his point. I can promote skepticism with clients and parents to influence their acceptance of new claims using skills of persuasion (Bailey & Burch, 2010). Doing so adheres to the Professional and Ethical Compliance Code of Behavior Analysts (BACB, 2014/2016) to advocate and ensure clients access effective treatments that will not cause the child or parents harm (Normand, 2008). Lastly, I can continue to refer to the evidence by being a “scientific-practitioner…. [by being a] proponent of evidence-based practice and good science” (Normand, 2008, p. 46), and to alter my position on any new claim based on sufficient evidence.ReferencesBailey, J., & Burch, M. (2010). 25 essential skills and strategies for the professional behaviour analyst (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.Behavior Analyst Certification Board. (2014/2016). Professional and Ethical Compliance Code for Behavior Analysts (version 2016). Retrieved from http://bacb.com/ethics-code Normand, M. P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(2), 42-49. doi: 10.1007/BF03391727

# data[].attributes.body
As Normand  (2008) stated in his article being skeptical is not so much about doubting the validity of everything but evaluate the validity of the statement based on empirical evidence. Such comment is fascinating since I use to see skepticism as being cynical. This view evolved and changed as I implemented better behavioral analysis practices, I became more critical such often scientists. While I do not identify as a scientist, Normand (2008) argues that behavior practitioner should identify as such.
I therefore would argue that I was not a healthy skeptic in the past. However, I have been working and developing my skill in the past year as I started my own practice. More importantly, all my actions, thoughts and perspective are being scrutinized as I now have staffed that not only look up to me for guidance but also a model. This situation pushed me to develop an interest in research and to be more skeptical, and try to foster healthy skepticism among my staff members. As Bailey and Burch (2010) described it, I try to be that boss that I wish I would have had. I try to offer an open discussion and conversation on the different topic that affects my team by providing /suggesting empirical evidence. Since we my staff is pretty on-the-go as we provide services in various daycare and homes, the conversation are more online. The position that I am currently in pushed me to research everything at first as extra effort. Now, I became more interested in the field and naturally research.  I also share much of the article that I encounter with my staff. I will definitively share Normand 's(2008) article with my team.
My skeptical practice in my line of work also affects my personal life. After all, we are not just behavior analyst, but a mother, daughters, friend, and spouse. I have definitively become more skeptical in my personal life. This is particularly true with sellers in stores, or with services providers that try to sell you various things.
I think healthy skeptic relates to evaluating the validity of the statement in one’s professional as well as personal life. It is about always verifying the validity of the knowledge we have acquired. Are my information still accurate? Was there other recent research that explores a particular topic? Healthy skepticism is a everyday matter.

References
Bailey, J., & Burch, M. (2010). 25 essential skills and strategies for the professional behaviour analyst (2nded.). New York, NY: Routledge

Normand, M.P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(2), 42-49.

# data[].attributes.headline
A culture of skepticism (Teal Shirk-Luckett)

# data[].attributes.subject
A culture of skepticism (Teal Shirk-Luckett)

# data[].attributes.body
I believe I am and will continue to be a healthy skeptic. Being skeptical is a part of my family culture. From a young age I remember my parents keeping an analyzing data on weather, garden harvest yields, and maple syrup production. From this data we knew when to plant the tomatoes out in the garden (after the last chance of frost), and whether it was time to tap the maple trees. My father would refute statements of “this is the worst snow fall”, and I knew if he said something was different than it had been in the last 20 years, it was because he had the data to back up that statement. This also led to being able to quickly evaluate statements on the radio or in a newspaper that made claims with no evident data.

When I began studying psychology for my undergraduate degree, I moved easily to using the scientific method and evaluating research. As Norman (2008) suggests, I am always immediately skeptical when an intervention (or a news headline) with which I am unfamiliar is being discussed or the only support for an intervention is that people feel that it was made a difference. For example, a colleague of mine (a manager within a different agency) was touting an amazing social group intervention. Privately after the meeting, I asked him to share the evidence that supported this group intervention. I was skeptical as he described the group resulting in large changes in behaviour based solely on attendance to the group, without follow up in other environments. Unfortunately even after requesting the information a second time, he did not provide me with anything and I was unable to find research supporting it’s use for youth with autism. I also regularly discuss how to evaluate sensory breaks. In the schools I support it is common for students with autism to leave their learning environment for three 15-20 minute breaks a day. Rarely is there any more support for this than it was recommended by an occupational therapist, it is in the student’s IEP, and she enjoys it. These students are missing 45-60 minutes of learning time each day for an unproven intervention.

I will continue to practice the suggestions made by Norman (2008) of reading widely, evaluating the outcomes my own interventions critically, and helping those I support to carefully evaluate other interventions they discuss with me.

Reference

Normand, M. P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(2), 42-49.

# data[].attributes.headline
Research and Skepticism (Eithne Sheeran)

# data[].attributes.subject
Research and Skepticism (Eithne Sheeran)

# data[].attributes.body
With regards to my own practice, I believe that the way I remain skeptical is through my interest in research and information about new trends in treatment and interventions. While I’m not in a position to contribute to research as Normand (2008) suggests, I believe that one can maintain a healthy skeptical outlook by maintaining an interest in current research.

When it comes to the supervision aspect of my practice, I try to foster this same reliance on research in my staff. When I read an interesting article or read research that supports an intervention we’re using, I’ll print out copies and offer them to the staff implementing the intervention or anyone else who is interested. I also try to lead conversations back to research- and evidence-based practices when I become engaged in conversations that stray out of behavioural practice. A good example of this occurred a few weeks ago. One of my staff members mentioned that she finds a client (recently diagnosed with ADHD) exhibits a lower frequency of problem behaviours on the days that we have gym class, she said that this could be because “he burns off all his energy”. I brought this back to research that I had encountered during a previous class, that looked at the effects of exercise on the severity of symptoms of ADHD. She was interested in this and asked to see some of the articles I was referencing.

I hope that taking this approach with my own staff helps to develop their own appreciation for research, which will hopefully help them develop their own attitude of healthy skepticism.

References:
Normand, M. P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(2), 42-49.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that in order to be a good behaviour analyst, we must remain skeptical. In order to provide the most effective treatment for our clients, it is essential that the interventions we are implementing are evidence based. However, healthy skepticism is a goal to work towards.

When thinking about myself, I think that I often believe people too easily. Not to say that I believe everything that I hear, but if something sounds right I am not one to be skeptical and do the research for myself. This is especially true when it comes to colleagues, others in the field who know what they are talking about. I think that as a professional, I need to learn to become a bit more skeptical and to ensure that the clients we are working with are getting the best possible interventions put in place.

In order to become more skeptical, I think that a good first goal is to read more articles! Normand (2008) mentions that being well read, and widely read, can make you a better skeptic. By reading more peer-reviewed articles and reading a wider variety of journals, we become better professionals in our field. Along with this, it is handy to be able to critically evaluate an article to ensure its validity.

Bre

References

Normand, M.P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(2), 42-49.

# data[].attributes.body
Healthy skepticism is an important part of being a successful behaviour analyst as this skills ensures we are providing the most effective treatment for the individuals we serve (Normand, 2008). Normand (2008) provides some great advice to be a healthy skeptic. He first suggests to read widely so to keep up-to-date with any new interventions (Normand, 2008). I think one thing I would add which is related to last week’s discussion is to network (Bailey and Burch, 2010), but for the purpose to stay connected amongst peers and informed about practices in the field. I have found it really helpful and relevant when peers have suggested articles, videos, or podcasts related to behaviour analytic practices. Normand’s (2008) other suggestion strongly relates to my current style of practice, which is to incorporate evaluative systems to eliminate any biases. I have worked hard in the last few years to eliminate biases and be curious by investigating and allowing the data to speak for itself.

Another important skill we learned from our previous course is to identify ‘bogus’ interventions from scientific interventions. The characteristics of ‘bogus’ or pseudoscience evidence often ‘dresses up’ the evidence through the use of anecdotes, unfalsifiable claims, opinions and endorsements  while objective proof is lacking (Leaf et al., 2016; Normand, 2008). Knowing about such characteristics can act as warning flags to be weary of an intervention. It is equally important to know the standards of evidence such as identifying a study’s interobserver rater, replication, experimental design, and limitations (Normand, 2008).

Moving forward, I plan to continue to learn from my peers, maintain my knowledge, and to investigate any suspicious claims or suggestions.

Warmly,
Mai

References

Bailey, J., & Burch, M. (2010). 25 essential skills and strategies for the professional behavior analyst (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Leaf, J. B., Kassardjian, A., Oppenheim-Leaf, M. L., Cihon, J. H., Taubman, M., Leaf, R., & McEachin, J. (2016). Social thinking®: science, pseudoscience, or antiscience?. Behavior analysis in practice, 9(2), 152-157.

Normand, M. P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(2), 42-49.

# data[].attributes.headline
To Be Skeptic Or To Not Be Skeptic, That Is The Question! 

# data[].attributes.subject
To Be Skeptic Or To Not Be Skeptic, That Is The Question! 

# data[].attributes.body
Ironically, I feel that sometimes I can be a little bit too skeptic when dealing with personal things that happen in my everyday life, versus how I would approach a situation in my workplace.

As a funny example, when listening to the Hot 89.9 in the morning, Jenni usually does a segment where she shares information that she's found via a study online. Usually her "Hot Flash" segments make me laugh because the information just seems so ridiculous that I'm always doubting the validity of the claims she is making. However, as Normand (2008) explains "even extraordinary  claims can be true, but the more extraordinary the claims, the more extraordinary the evidence required" (p. 42). In my opinion, I would say that a lot of the studies she finds on the internet to include in her "Hot Flash" make extraordinary claims, but I do not feel that there would be enough evidence to support them. However, it makes for a great comedic drive into work!

One of the rules I tend to live by and this sort of takes the fun out of life, but I like to "see it before I believe it" as the old saying goes. I think this is due to the fact that I come from a mostly scientific background. However, Normand (2008) also mentions how scientists also take this approach by explaining how, "what scientists say should be controlled primarily by what is seen, rather than what one hopes to see" (p. 42). This means that our own personal biases need to be controlled to ultimately produce the correct information for others to learn.

Therefore, I think that for me, something that I'm working on is being able to eliminate any personal biases I have by choosing to do my research on anything that I may be skeptical about. It could be anything from an intervention I'm implementing at work, to learning about a new diet that one of my friends are trying to choosing a certain set of new golf clubs, to looking at different brands to get of Advil. I'm always being skeptical, but trying to let the evidence (e.g. the story) speak for itself. In this way, I'm being respectful of all parties involved.

Lastly, as Normand (2008) mentions, "as the evidence in one study is verified by other studies, the probability of explanations other than those suggested by the data shrinks" (p. 46). By doing my research first, I can eliminate allowing my personal biases to come into play when making a statement to others and I can more accurately give my own opinion.

Cierra

References

Normand, M. P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(2), 42-49.

# data[].attributes.headline
A Healthy Dose of Skepticism (Kelsey Clarke)

# data[].attributes.subject
A Healthy Dose of Skepticism (Kelsey Clarke)

# data[].attributes.body
Normand (2008) provides a lot of great information on employing a healthy dose of skepticism within our everyday lives, which can be employed at home and at work. While I pride myself on being good at identifying pseudoscience, I appreciate the descriptions Normand (2008) provides on the commonalities found in pseudoscientific literature and will likely refer to them with clients who frequently ask me about all the common fads they have read about. When confronted with questions about recent news in the autism treatment world, I always respond by saying that I will research it and get back to them. I then try to do my due diligence and research the topic, making sure not to limit it to just one study or journal. I try to employ Normand's (2008) tip to read widely within one's specialty. By having read up from multiple sources on a topic, I feel better prepared to inform parents about the research and either support or oppose the treatment.

References
Normand, M. P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1, 42-49.

# data[].attributes.headline
Reading, Viewing, and Reading Some More (Amanda Sim)

# data[].attributes.subject
Reading, Viewing, and Reading Some More (Amanda Sim)

# data[].attributes.body
When it comes to the review of printed media, I have developed some habits for employing skepticism. I first look for references to other print sources and review those sources for familiar authors or publications within peer-reviewed journals. Then I look at the scientific evidence itself and make note if there was no experimentation employed.  Normand (2008) suggests a review of the experimental design, specifically the number of replications of effect, and a comparison of this information to the strength of the conclusions made. A reputable piece of literature will let the science speak for itself, so I am always leery of testimonials and bold, unreferenced claims, which are key components of pseudoscience (Normand, 2008).

One way I like to practice my skills in skepticism “on my feet” is through watching American television commercials, specifically on the topics of medication and legal intervention. These commercials are often rife with pseudoscience, and I do not hesitate to vocalize my skeptical analysis in the safety of my own home.

Normand (2008) emphasises the importance and the implications of reading a broad range of scientific literature from various disciplines. This recommendation is excellent in theory, but perhaps more difficult in practice. To optimize my time, I would want to read the seminal articles from numerous disciplines, but I am not schooled on how to find the best of the best within a field. Perhaps I will set myself a goal of finding out how to find out what these seminal articles are, so I can read widely and become better are recognizing pseudoscience by comparing it to the real science (Normand, 2008).

Reference

Normand, M. P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice 1(2), 42-49.

# data[].attributes.headline
Look for Evidence, Analyze the Evidence (Kasia Sowa)

# data[].attributes.subject
Look for Evidence, Analyze the Evidence (Kasia Sowa)

# data[].attributes.body
To better understand this question I had to look up the differences between skeptic and pessimistic. I tend to question everything because I want to know how it works, I consider myself an optimist but it crossed my mind if this spills into pessimism. “Healthy skepticism demands evidence” (Sanders, 2016). Essentially this is the foundation of our field. Being skeptical just means asking for evidence not denying the evidence when it is presented.

Normand (2008) stresses the importance of being a skeptic when it comes to treatment in the field of ABA as treatments may look and sound great but lack evidence to support being great. In other words being skeptical is almost an ethical requirement.

I plan to continue to ask for evidence and ask questions of the evidence. I acknowledge my own biases and to try to remain impartial. I aim to take on perspectives of both sides when being skeptical. This includes families, other professionals and even those who conducted research. When looking at presented research being skeptical should include assessing studies, designs, IOA, replication, where and who it was published by and so on.

References

Normand, M. P. (2008). Science, Skepticism, and Applied Behavior Analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice,1(2), 42-49. doi:10.1007/bf03391727

Sanders, R. (2016, September 25). What Is "Healthy Skepticism" in Science? Retrieved from https://futurism.com/science-denial-what-is-healthy-skepticism-in-science/

# data[].attributes.body
Normand (2008) began the article by explaining that skepticism is “to judge the validity of a claim based on objective empirical evidence.” (p. 42).  Skepticism is not to deny the evidence but to investigate the available evidence before making decisions or judgement.  Since the beginning of this masters program, I have become more skeptical towards unfamiliar treatments. In order to be healthy skeptic, one must “know the real science” (Normand, 2008, p. 46).  When I face unfamiliar treatment, I would first request for more information and successful stories from the non-behaviouraI members of the team.  I would also inquire other professional in the field and/or my direct supervisor and review empirically tested studies about the treatment before deciding the treatment.  Normand (2008) includes characteristics of pseudoscience that serve as guidance for the investigation. The decision-making model suggested by Brodhead (2015) is also a practical method to guide behaviour analysts to become healthy skeptics.

Victoria

References

Brodhead, M. (2015). Maintaining professional relationships in an interdisciplinary setting: Strategies for navigating nonbehavioral treatment recommendations for individuals with autism. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 8(1), 70.

Normand, M. P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(2), 42-49.

# data[].attributes.body
When we read Normand (2008) last year, I found it to be a really important and influential article which I often refer to. Today, I feel it's importance even more so. Being a healthy skeptic has been a skill that has been embedded in all of our courses so far, and I really like how reading it a second time for this course has left me noticing new aspects.
Read and Read Widely: This section really hit me last year, and it remains so now. As we all often work on interdisciplinary teams, I try hard to think of this as a strength in treatment, as opposed to an obstacle. I have made it a point to try to ask questions and for resources from other professionals related to autism. This way, if a treatment has been suggested, I can be skeptical (Normand, 2008), or try to apply Brodhead's (2015) model to it. Being genuinely interested in what other fields have to offer is the key for me here. Avoiding "rushing to judgement" (Brodhead, 2015, p. 46) but rather investigating the claims, is one way I plan to be a healthy skeptic.
Be a Scientist-Practitioner: Another way I plan to be and remain a healthy skeptic is to continue to learn more about what makes scientific claims evidence-based. After the material in Module One, we saw the non-consistent and often confusing mismatch of evidence based practice claims (e.g. Wong et al., 2014, National Autism Center, 2015). Normand (2008) states that we wear two hats: a practitioner and scientist. While I am currently and practitioner and intend to always be, I must remember to also be a scientist in order to be ethical and effective in my practice. This involves remaining skeptical of claims, both within ABA and outside of ABA, and working hard to always be a scientist too (while I must admit this has been the greatest learning curve for me in the program!).

In conclusion, I intend on being and remaining to be a healthy skeptic by being open to other suggestions and investigating them correctly, and remaining scientific in my role. Normand (2008) does a great job at making practical, applicable suggestions in order to be professionally skeptical in our practice.

References

Brodhead, M. (2015). Maintaining professional relationships in an interdisciplinary setting: Strategies for navigating nonbehavioral treatment recommendations for individuals with autism. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 8(1), 70.

National Autism Center. (2015). Findings and conclusions, national standards project, phase 2. Retrieved from http://www.nationalautismcenter.org/national- standards-project/

Normand, M. P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(2), 42-49.

Wong, C., Odom, S. L., Hume, K. Cox, A. W., Fettig, A., Kucharczyk, S., ... Schultz, T. R. (2014). Evidence-based practices for children, youth, and young adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, Autism Evidence-Based Practice Review Group. Retrieved from http://fpg.unc.edu/sites/fpg.unc.edu /files/resources/reports-and-policy-briefs/2014-EBP-Report.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
Hi everyone,

I agree with Normand (2008) that it’s incredibly important for us behaviour analysts to approach scientific claims with skepticism, for the sake of our clients benefiting from the most effective, non-harmful treatment. I like to think that I do approach scientific claims (and claims in general) with a healthy dose of skepticism. In practicing ABA, I have gained a general sense over the years of practices that are evidence-based interventions for individuals with ASD (like ABA is!), and practices that are not evidence-based, such as fad diets, mega vitamins, facilitated communication, and harmful practices like chelation therapy. Reading the National Standards Project, Phase 2 (NAC, 2015) and Wong et al. (2014) has also helped me gain a more solid understanding of evidence-based versus non-evidence-based practices for people with ASD. If I hear about a practice and am unsure about its evidence base, I look up research for it and talk to my supervisors.

When learning how to evaluate articles to tell if they are likely to show evidence for an intervention, I find the tools outlined by Normand (2008) very helpful (inter-observer agreement, experimental design, replication, and self-correction). I admit that I don’t always look carefully for IOA, as I tend to assume it will be in the article. I also think that I could do a better job of reading widely (Normand, 2008), as I don’t read many articles or relevant books outside of our assigned readings. A big part of this is the time needed to read, but I would prefer to regularly read our main ABA journals and relevant journals outside the field, as mentioned by Normand (2008).

Right now, I am working with a young client whose school is implementing a core vocabulary booklet for her, which I am not convinced will be understood by her or beneficial to her based on her current level of communication. I am trying to go through Normand’s (2008) steps by researching the literature on core vocabulary and asking the school practitioner and some speech therapists I work with about the procedure, and look for evidence for and against the procedure. I don’t see it being harmful, but also don’t see the way it is being used as being beneficial, either. I would like to ask more questions and propose an alternative to her school team that is more likely to be effective for this client.

Thanks everyone,

Sarah

References

National Autism Center (2015). Findings and conclusions: National standards project, phase 2.

Retrieved from http://www.nationalautismcenter.org/national-standards-project/

Normand, M. P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in

Practice, 1(2), 42-49. doi: 10.1007/BF03391727

Wong, C., Odom, S. L., Hume, K. Cox, A. W., Fettig, A., Kucharczyk, S., … Schultz, T. R

(2014). Evidence-based practices for children, youth, and young adults with Autism

Spectrum Disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(7), 1951-1966.

doi: 10.1007/s10803-014-2351-z

# data[].attributes.headline
Remaining a Healthy Skeptic (Michelle Pearson)

# data[].attributes.subject
Remaining a Healthy Skeptic (Michelle Pearson)

# data[].attributes.body
A primary way in which I currently practice to be a healthy skeptic is remaining critical and reflective of my own practices (Normand, 2008). I recently became more critical of my own practices by incorporating this awareness into my daily work when developing and evaluating treatment plans for my clients. This important skill was brought to my attention by my new Clinical Supervisor who is also conducting my BCBA supervision. This supervisor challenges me in the sense that she allows me to present my ideas, gives me validation, but also asks though provoking questions. These questions prompt me to think about matters such as, “will the protocol generalize well to other environments?”, “what is the end goal for the client in regards to _____ skill?”, or “thinking long term, does that skill development benefit the client or is socially valid?” etc.

A way in which I hope to be more skeptical is to review literature outside of behaviour analysis that could remain applicable to our work (Normand, 2008). As Normand (2008) discusses, there exists a fair amount of research that can be applicable to our practices that may not be taken into consideration as they fall outside of the standard behaviour analytic journals. Normand (2008) also states the importance to attend workshops or conferences that may be outside of the realm of behaviour analysis and “not just attend programs that rehash the same old material originating from the same group of researchers and practitioners” (p. 47). I value collaborating with other behaviour analysts and practitioners in general so I can appreciate the significance of gaining exposure to different research groups.

Reference

Normand, M. P. (2008). Science, skepticism, and applied behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1, 42-49.