A recent study published in the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders found that a significant majority (73%) of informational videos on TikTok tagged with "#Autism" contain inaccurate or overgeneralized information about autism. Despite the prevalence of misinformation, these videos have amassed billions of views, highlighting the potential for widespread misconceptions about autism on the platform. ...
I am not disputing the fact that there is a ton of misinformation about Autism on TikTok (and the internet as a whole), because there absolutely is and it’s dangerous. But it gives me pause that the researcher behind this study developed and promotes a treatment method that is essentially a cousin of ABA. That makes me incredibly skeptical of what his rubric might be for filtering the claims as factual or not.
ABA, for those that don’t know, is based on Skinner’s operant conditioning and was created by the man who developed “gay conversion therapy.” He once said this:
“You see, you start pretty much from scratch when you work with an autistic child. You have a person in the physical sense – they have hair, a nose and a mouth – but they are not people in the psychological sense. One way to look at the job of helping autistic kids is to see it as a matter of constructing a person. You have the raw materials, but you have to build the person.”
If “operant conditioning” makes you think of dog training, you’re right. ABA is dog training for Autistic people. It is conversion therapy. It does not “intervene” in their Autism so much as it forces them to appear more neurotypical, and a study from 2018 suggests that it actually creates PTSD symptoms in the patients–that it is traumatic–which is in-line with many firsthand accounts of people that have been through ABA.
So the guy behind this analysis developed his own practice which is rooted in ABA and centers around operant conditioning. I’m sure a lot of what he finds to be false is probably false and not scientifically-supported, but I would def be skeptical of what he considers to be misinformation in some instances since ABA is technically scientifically-supported for autism intervention, due to it’s effectiveness in making Autistic people appear more neurotypical (without regard for their psychological wellbeing in many cases).
But with that said, I’m just some schmuck on the internet. I highly recommend reading Autistic people’s perspectives on it and seeing what verified smart people have to say.
If “operant conditioning” makes you think of dog training, you’re right.
This isn’t the bad part. Operant conditioning is how all behaviours are formed, if something gives a positive feeling or takes away a bad one the behaviour increases, if it adds negative feeling or takes away a positive one the behaviour decreases.
The issue with ABA is firstly trying to take a persons personhood away, teaching someone that who they are is bad, and secondly the mad schedules they impose. It might be that a person doesn’t feel comfortable with eye contact, the ideal situation is we go “cool, don’t do that” and everyone is just cool with it, a middle ground that is a good idea is to help the person get used to using intermittent eye contact or using little tricks like looking at someones nose or forehead. The ABA solution is we force the person to make eye contact for an hour a day, regardless of comfort, and witholding a comfort item, like a tablet, until they have completed that hour. It’s treating a child (or sometimes an adult) as a non-entity, just an issue that needs to be fixed, needs to be ‘normal’.
I am not disputing the fact that there is a ton of misinformation about Autism on TikTok (and the internet as a whole), because there absolutely is and it’s dangerous. But it gives me pause that the researcher behind this study developed and promotes a treatment method that is essentially a cousin of ABA. That makes me incredibly skeptical of what his rubric might be for filtering the claims as factual or not.
ABA, for those that don’t know, is based on Skinner’s operant conditioning and was created by the man who developed “gay conversion therapy.” He once said this:
“You see, you start pretty much from scratch when you work with an autistic child. You have a person in the physical sense – they have hair, a nose and a mouth – but they are not people in the psychological sense. One way to look at the job of helping autistic kids is to see it as a matter of constructing a person. You have the raw materials, but you have to build the person.”
If “operant conditioning” makes you think of dog training, you’re right. ABA is dog training for Autistic people. It is conversion therapy. It does not “intervene” in their Autism so much as it forces them to appear more neurotypical, and a study from 2018 suggests that it actually creates PTSD symptoms in the patients–that it is traumatic–which is in-line with many firsthand accounts of people that have been through ABA.
So the guy behind this analysis developed his own practice which is rooted in ABA and centers around operant conditioning. I’m sure a lot of what he finds to be false is probably false and not scientifically-supported, but I would def be skeptical of what he considers to be misinformation in some instances since ABA is technically scientifically-supported for autism intervention, due to it’s effectiveness in making Autistic people appear more neurotypical (without regard for their psychological wellbeing in many cases).
But with that said, I’m just some schmuck on the internet. I highly recommend reading Autistic people’s perspectives on it and seeing what verified smart people have to say.
Here are some pieces I find enlightening:
This isn’t the bad part. Operant conditioning is how all behaviours are formed, if something gives a positive feeling or takes away a bad one the behaviour increases, if it adds negative feeling or takes away a positive one the behaviour decreases.
The issue with ABA is firstly trying to take a persons personhood away, teaching someone that who they are is bad, and secondly the mad schedules they impose. It might be that a person doesn’t feel comfortable with eye contact, the ideal situation is we go “cool, don’t do that” and everyone is just cool with it, a middle ground that is a good idea is to help the person get used to using intermittent eye contact or using little tricks like looking at someones nose or forehead. The ABA solution is we force the person to make eye contact for an hour a day, regardless of comfort, and witholding a comfort item, like a tablet, until they have completed that hour. It’s treating a child (or sometimes an adult) as a non-entity, just an issue that needs to be fixed, needs to be ‘normal’.