|
| Applied Behavior Analysis as a Profession: Licensure, Criminology, and Behavioral Medicine |
| Sunday, May 30, 2010 |
| 4:30 PM–5:50 PM |
| Bonham B (Grand Hyatt) |
| Area: TPC |
| Chair: Douglas S. Lee (Behavioral Solutions, Inc.) |
| |
| Preventing the Roots of Our Past From Entangling the Flora of the Future: Considerations for Licensure and Mainstream Impressions of Applied Behavior Analysis |
| Domain: Applied Behavior Analysis |
| DOUGLAS S. LEE (Behavioral Solutions, Inc.), Cristin D. Johnston (Behavioral Solutions, Inc), Mike R. Johnston (Behavioral Solutions, Inc.) |
| |
| Abstract: Applied behavior analysis (ABA) as a field is pursing certification and licensure as means towards increasing the field’s professional image and providing public protection from incompetent ABA providers. Behavior Modification on the other hand proliferates in the absence of any oversight yet clearly promotes the use of ABA techniques and procedures. Monitoring the public exposure to ABA and behavior modification via "Google Alert" presents some startling results. A comparison of areas in which ABA and Behavior Modification are reported via mainstream news outlets is presented. ABA is being completely out flanked and overwhelmed in the general public by Behavior Modification except in the area of Autism. Currently anyone can call themselves and expert in Behavior Modification and can practice freely. By failing to recognize our historical roots we are failing to encompass Behavior Modification as a controlled term even when achieving licensure (see Oklahoma legislation). Suggestions for inclusion of Behavior Modification within ABA related certification and licensure and improvements in improving the public’s exposure to ABA are made. |
| |
| Akers' (1979) Social Learning Theory, Radical Behaviorism, and the Practice of Applied Behavior Analysis as Models for Explaining Criminal Behavior |
| Domain: Theory |
| ANIA M. YOUNG (Virginia Commonwealth University) |
| |
| Abstract: This paper provides suggestions on how Akers' (1979) social learning theory, designed to explain criminal behavior, can be strengthened by supplementing it with ideas grounded in radical behaviorism and contemporary applied behavior analysis. This paper argues that a) social learning theory appears to miss an emphasis on selected critical concepts which are grounded in the philosophy of behaviorism and that b) in order for the theory to gain full respect of members of the criminal justice academia and practitioners, it may benefit from placing more emphasis on the philosophy of radical behaviorism and the field of applied behavior analysis. Specifically, two selected issues are advocated: 1) a use of scientific language that operationally defines abstract phenomena and 2) a more thorough analysis of motivational variables that result in criminal behavior. |
| |
| Comparison of Theoretical Approaches in Behavioral Medicine as Seen Through the Looking Glass of Mechner’s Notational System |
| Domain: Applied Behavior Analysis |
| ROCIO HERNANDEZ-POZO (FES Iztacala UNAM) |
| |
| Abstract: According to Dekker (2008) the field of behavioral medicine is witnessing a more elaborated use of theories to further comprehension of empirical findings, however most of the times the differences among these models are elusive, specially in terms of the methodological consequences for acceptable research to elucidate central assumptions of such models. The notational contingency analysis of behavior system proposed by Mechner (2008) is proposed as a methodological tool to compare such models, by means of translating representative exemplars of five theoretical approaches. Diagrams of the stress and emotional regulation theory (Brown, Katzel, Neumann, Maier & Waldstein, 2007), the theory on health behavior, health and disease (Veenhof , Van den Endem Dekker, Köke, Oostendorp & Bijlsma, 2007), the theory on contextual determinants of health behavior (Siegrist, 1996), the social cognitive theory on health behavior (Renner, Kwon, Yang, Paik, Kim, Roh, Song & Schwarzer 2008) and the theory of personality and health (Denollet, Pedersen, Ong, Serruys, Erdman & Van Domburg , 2006) are presented in detail in order to unravel subtle assumptions, similarities, levels of complexity and to highlight unclear aspects of their descriptions. |
| |
|
| |