Ethics of Standardization of Practice
The standardization of decision-making in behavior-analytic practice may reduce practitioner effort while simultaneously freeing resources to engage in other, and perhaps more complex, tasks. However, the extent to which standardized processes for decision-making improve practitioner performance, and subsequently improve client outcomes, is not quite clear. Furthermore, the ethical implications of standardizing decision-making processes require careful consideration. The purpose of this presentation is to present three recent research studies on the standardization of decision-making in behavior analysis, using visual analysis as a case example. The purpose and results of the reviewed studies will be discussed in the context of ethical and professional issues (e.g., scope of competence, the right to effective treatment, and individualized behavior-change programs) that are at the forefront of practicing-behavior analysts.
Presented at the 2019 Michigan Autism Conference
Matthew T. Brodhead, Ph.D., BCBA-D, is an Assistant Professor at Michigan State University. His research examines the behavioral determinants of response variability and decision-making in children with autism. He is also interested in research and conceptual issues relating to the ethical and professional behaviors of practicing behavior analysts. Through workshops and consultation, he has established multiple school-based programs for children with autism, and he has provided training to teachers, related service providers, and behavior analysts throughout the United States.