In 2001, the National Research Council's Committee on Educational Interventions for Children with Autism reviewed comprehensive intervention programs for young children with autism. Programs based on applied behavior analysis, especially the work of Lovaas and his co-researchers at the UCLA Young Autism Project (UCLA YAP), had reported the best outcomes from interventions for children with autism. Lovaas (1987) designed an intervention that was used approximately 40 hours a week for a period of 2 or 3 years with an experimental group of children with autism who were under 4 years of age at the start of the study. Although the UCLA Young Autism Project program has not been effective for all the children with autism on whom it has been tried, it can be an effective intervention for some children with autism. After the intervention, 47% of the children in the experimental group were reported to have test results indicating normal IQ. However, because children with autism do not usually benefit from interventions to that extent, the results have been closely scrutinized and have received some major criticisms. One criticism has been that Lovaas used the word "recovery" to describe children who had achieved an IQ within the average range and placement in regular classrooms. Other criticisms focused on methodological limitations in Lovaas' research, including the lack of random assignment to groups. Recent replications have attempted to address these and other methodological criticisms, incorporating stronger methodologies, including random assignment to groups. In addition, variations of the original intervention protocol have been examined, including parent-managed, community-based, and school-based programs.
View full abstract