RESUMEN
Many in the autistic community have expressed concerns regarding the use of behavioral interventions with autistic children, suggesting that these interventions may not be socially valid. Though behavioral interventions have evolved to be more naturalistic and child-centered, little structured research has been done to explicitly seek autistic perspectives on the acceptability of specific components of behavioral interventions. Autistic adults (N = 235) were recruited online to take the Autism Intervention Attitudes Scale (AIAS), a questionnaire designed to gather feedback on common intervention goals and practices. Results indicate that participants find goals and practices that highlight quality of life, safety, and autistic interactions acceptable, while those that focus on normalization based on neurotypical standards are not. An exploratory graph analysis revealed three communities of goals ("uncontroversial goals", "controversial goals", and "social goals"). Comparison between naturalistic and structured intervention components additionally showed that autistic participants favored naturalistic strategies. These findings are in line with known criticisms of behavioral intervention from autistic adults, but also provide more information on the specific ways in which behavioral interventions can be reformed. This information can guide professionals in the development of appropriate goals and decisions around intervention planning.
RESUMEN
The social validity of autism behavioral intervention has been questioned. Naturalistic Developmental Behavioral Interventions (NDBIs) attempt to address some concerns, but it is unclear whether autistic people consider NDBIs socially valid. Social validity of an NDBI, Pivotal Response Treatment (PRT), was investigated through autistic adults commenting on videos of autistic children receiving PRT. Qualitative coding of responses generated three themes: respect for individuals; assessment of intervention implementation; and socioemotional considerations. Although video brevity limits the scope of the present study's conclusions, participants highlighted PRT components that appeared socially valid (e.g., reinforcing attempts, following the child's lead) and aspects appearing invalid (e.g., overemphasis on spoken language). Therefore, adjustments appear necessary for PRT to be fully acceptable to the autistic community.
RESUMEN
Proponents of autism intervention and those of the neurodiversity movement often appear at odds, the former advocating for intensive treatments and the latter arguing that autism must be accepted as a form of diversity. The history of behavioral intervention has understandably outraged many in the Autistic community, though many still value supports focused on quality of life. This commentary argues that Naturalistic Developmental Behavioral Interventions (NDBIs) hold promise for bridging the gap between early intervention and the neurodiversity movement. However, we recognize NDBIs have much room to grow and suggest multiple strategies for improvement. We believe these updates are not only feasible for clinicians and researchers to implement but will ultimately lead to improved quality of life for Autistic individuals.