Is this the correct way to look at ABA therapy?

Post Reply New Topic

I've been reading about it and I felt like I was missing something that wasn't explicitly pointed out, I was also wondering why the mix up with the Skinner terminology.

But I think I finally understand what the ultimate point is, and that is to essentially remove intent or understanding from the equation. Using ABA you don't worry about the subject's intent or how much they understand, you just focus solely on the behavior ALONE. Basically you don't try to "get inside" of the head of the person you're training, or make sure they understand the larger picture of why they will be doing something, you're just encouraging or discouraging behaviors.

Do I have this correct? Or am I off course here.

"Radical behaviourism" takes into account thoughts and feelings, and ABA nowadays is based on radical behaviourism, so it does take intention into account as that's a thought in itself.

When training a dog, you also take into account, the way a dog feels and thinks. The relevant point out of my oppinion is empathy. Do you train the being, by using its emotions, feeling and thoughts, to improve the affected beings life or does it not matter to you, what the affected being itself needs to improve its life? I can take a dog feeling and thoughts and use it to teach him circus tricks, but becoming a circus dog and doing tricks all day, will not improve the dogs life. While using a dogs feeling and thoughts to teach him, to deal better with situations that scare him or stress him, will improve his life.

So its simply about what the ABA trainer are focusing on. Do they focus on improving the affected beings life, or are they trying to teach them circus tricks and worsening their lifes, to benefit other people as parents or teachers?