The field of autism treatment has progressed a great deal in the last 30 years. I think you would hard-pressed to find anyone currently in this area who uses or would advocate electric shock and/or strait jackets.
Linda Tollefsrud, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology University of Wisconsin - Barron County 1800 College Drive Rice Lake, WI 54868 (715) 234 8176 ext. 5417 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: Joan Warmbold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 4:37 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: [tips] Re: Kansas punishment Thanks so much for this clarification. Many folks are not aware that this self-injurious behavior is so challenging to stop that institutions have often resorted to putting these children in strait jackets to prevent serious injuries. Joan > At 1:35 PM -0500 4/12/06, Michael Scoles wrote: >>J Appl Behav Anal. 1971 Fall; 4(3): 201-213. >>doi: 10.1901/jaba.1971.4-201. >>A comparison of procedures for eliminating >>self-injurious behavior of retarded >>adolescents<http://www.pubmedcentral.gov/pagerender.fcgi?artid=1310693 &pageindex=1#fn1>1 >>Henry E. Corte, Montrose M. Wolf, and Bill J. Locke > > Note the severity of the behaviors, and the > consequences of _not_ stopping them: > > Corte, H. E., Wolf, M. M., & Locke, B. J. (1971). > A comparison of procedures for eliminating > self-injurious behavior of retarded adolescents. > Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 4, 201-213. > An attempt was made to eliminate the > self-injurious behaviors of four > institutionalized, profoundly retarded > adolescents. Some of the behaviors studied were: > face-slapping, face-banging, hair-pulling, > face-scratching, and finger-biting. Three > remediative approaches to self-injurious behavior > were compared. Elimination of all social > consequences of the self- injurious behavior was > not effective with the two subjects with whom it > was attempted. The same two subjects were exposed > to a procedure involving reinforcement of > non-self-injurious behavior which was ineffective > under no food deprivation and was effective with > one of the two subjects under mild food > deprivation. Electric-shock punishment eliminated > the self-injurious behaviors of all four subjects > with whom it was attempted. The results suggested > that punishment was more effective than > differential reinforcement of non-self-injurious > behavior which, in turn, was more effective than > extinction through elimination of social > consequences. However, the effects of the > punishment were usually specific to the setting > in which it was administered. In order to > eliminate the self-injurious behaviors of > severely retarded children, it is apparently > necessary to carry out the treatment in many of > the settings in which it occurs. > > -- > The best argument against Intelligent Design is that fact that > people believe in it. > > * PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] * > * Psychology Dept Minnesota State University * > * 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217 * > * http://krypton.mnsu.edu/~pkbrando/ * > > --- > To make changes to your subscription go to: > http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang= english > > --- To make changes to your subscription go to: http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang= english --- To make changes to your subscription go to: http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
