|
| Community Reinforcement Approach and Community Reinforcement and Family Training |
| Saturday, May 29, 2010 |
| 3:00 PM–3:50 PM |
| 103AB (CC) |
| Area: CBM; Domain: Applied Behavior Analysis |
| Chair: Thomas J. Waltz (University of Nevada, Reno) |
| ROBERT J. MEYERS (Robert J. Meyers, Ph.D. & Associates) |
 Robert J. Meyers, Ph.D. (cra-craft@www.robertjmeyersphd.com) is a research associate professor of psychology working at the University of New Mexico's Center on Alcoholism, Substance Abuse and Addicitons, and is in private practice and can be reached at www.robertjmeyersphd.com. Dr. Meyers is the winner of the 2002 Dan Anderson research award from the Hazelden Foundation, and the 2003 young investigator award from the Research Society on Alcoholism. He has published over 60 scientific articles and co-authored 5 books on addiction, including "Get Your Loved One Sober: Alternatives to Nagging, Pleading and Threatening" and Motivation substance abusers to enter treatment: working with family members". Dr. Meyers has been in the addiction field for 30 years and at the University of New Mexico for over 20. |
| Abstract: Community Reinforcement Approach (CRA) and Community Reinforcement and Family Training(CRAFT) are two empirically-supported behavioral substance abuse programs. While CRA is a treatment for the substance abusing individual, CRAFT is an intervention designed for the concerned significant others (CSOs) of treatment-refusing individuals with alcohol or drug problems. CRA has been evaluated in dozens of clinical trials, starting in 1973, and it continues to be examined internationally. The newer CRAFT program teaches CSOs how to influence substance abusing loved ones so that they seek treatment. Specifically, CRAFT shows CSOs how to change their behavior toward the drinker or drug user such that clean and sober behavior is rewarded and drinking and using behavior is discouraged. On average, CRAFT-trained CSOs can get their loved ones to enter treatment after only five CSO sessions. Both CRA and CRAFT are based on operant principles. Each program is built on the belief that a person’s “community” (family, friends, job, church, social activities) must reinforce and support a clean and sober lifestyle. This lecture will present the seminal studies that led to the development of CRA and CRAFT. Dr. Meyers also will discuss some of the clinical techniques that are instrumental in making these treatments successful. |
|
| |
| |
|
| Don't Call Me Nuts: How to Study the Stigma of Mental Illness |
| Saturday, May 29, 2010 |
| 4:00 PM–4:50 PM |
| Ballroom A (CC) |
| Area: CSE; Domain: Applied Behavior Analysis |
| Chair: Patricia Bach (Illinois Institute of Technology) |
| PATRICK W. CORRIGAN (Illinois Institute of Technology) |
 Patrick Corrigan is Distinguished Professor of Psychology at the Illinois Institute of Technology and Associate Dean for Research. Prior to that, Corrigan was professor of Psychiatry and Executive Director of the Center for Psychiatric Rehabilitation at the University of Chicago, being there for 14 years. Corrigan has been principal investigator of federally funded studies on rehabilitation and consumer operated services. Ten years ago, he became principal investigator of the Chicago Consortium for Stigma Research, the only NIMH-funded research center examining the stigma of mental illness. More recently, the Chicago Consortium evolved into the National Consortium on Stigma and Empowerment (NCSE), supported by NIMH as a developing center in services research. Centered at IIT, NCSE includes co-principal investigators from Yale, the University of Pennsylvania, and Rutgers. One recent study supported by NIAAA, NIMH, and The Fogarty Center examined the stigma of mental illness endorsed by employers in Beijing, Chicago, and Hong Kong. In the few years, Corrigan has partnered with colleagues from the Department for Veteran Affairs and Department of Defense to develop and evaluate anti-stigma programs meant to help soldiers from Iraq and Afghanistan seek out services for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder when needed. Corrigan is a prolific researcher having published eleven books and more than 250 papers. He is editor of the American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation. |
| Abstract: Context has been added to models seeking to better understand behavior change with stigma being in important contextual construct. Many people in distress do not pursue appropriate clinical services, or drop out of these services prematurely, in order to escape the harm of psychiatric labels. People with psychiatric disabilities often find life goals including real work and independent living blocked by employers or landlords who endorse the stigma of mental illness. Some people with mental illness internalize the stigma leading to the why try effect: “Why should I try to get a job? I am unable to handle it competently.” This lecture reviews the various forms of label avoidance, public-stigma, and self-stigma. In the process, research by our group that sheds light on stigma is summarized. Most important to our current work is developing and evaluating anti-stigma programs. In the process of conducting outcome studies, we have begun to identify the conundra that confound research in this arena. The presentation ends with a review of important research issues. |
|
| |
| |
|
| Reading Intervention in Grades K-12: Scientifically Informed Policy |
| Saturday, May 29, 2010 |
| 4:00 PM–4:50 PM |
| 103AB (CC) |
| Area: EDC; Domain: Applied Behavior Analysis |
| Chair: Cathy L. Watkins (California State University, Stanislaus) |
| BARBARA R. FOORMAN (Florida State University) |
 Barbara Foorman, Ph.D., holds a joint appointment as the Francis Eppes Professor of Education and Director of the Florida Center for Reading Research at Florida State University. During 2005, Dr. Foorman served as the Commissioner of Education Research in the Institute of Education Sciences in the U.S. Department of Education. Before that Dr. Foorman was a professor at the University of Texas-Houston and at the University of Houston. Dr. Foorman has over 120 publications in the area of reading and language development, is co-editor of the Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, and has been principal investigator of federally-funded grants on early reading interventions, scaling assessment-driven instruction, and literacy development in Spanish-speaking children. She has been a member of several national consensus committees related to reading. She also leads professional development and technical assistance grants in Florida and for the national Center on Instruction—Reading Strand. Dr. Foorman is an author of vocabulary, spelling, and phonemic awareness curricula and is a primary author of the TPRI early reading assessment and the FAIR K-12 formative reading assessments used in Florida. |
| Abstract: The state of the art in reading remediation is prevention and early intervention. Because of the difficulty of remediating older students and the relative success of early intervention efforts, policy in the United States encourages prevention. Under the Individuals With Disabilities Educational Improvement Act of 2004 districts may use up to 15% of special education funds for prevention and early intervention. This shift in federal law allows districts to use funds to provide intervention to struggling readers before they fail to meet grade-level achievement standards. In addition, the new law provides an alternative to the previous requirement that students’ low achievement be unexpected (i.e., discrepant) relative to their intelligence in order to qualify them for special education services. The alternative approach, called response to intervention (RTI), means that a local education agency “may use a process that determines if the child responds to scientific, research-based intervention as a part of the evaluation procedures” (Pub. L. No. 108-446 § 614 [b][6][A]; § 614 [b] [2 & 3]). In this presentation Dr. Foorman will review the evidence for effective reading interventions, at both the elementary and secondary levels. Additionally, she will discuss challenges to implementing RTI models in schools and offer possible solutions. |
|
| |