Behavior Modification Facility - History and Controversy

History and Controversy

In the late 1960s behavior modification or practice referred to as applied behavior analysis began to move rapidly into residential treatment facilities. The goal was to redesign the behavioral architecture around delinquent teens to lessen chances of recidivism and improve academics Harold Cohen and James Filipczak (1971) published a book hailing the successes of such programs in doubling learning rates and reducing recidivism This book even contained an introduction from the leading behaviorist at the time, B.F. Skinner hailing the achievements. Independent analysis of multiple sites with thousands of adolescents found behavior modification to be more effective then treatment as usual, a therapeutic milieu, and as effective as more psychologically intense programs such as transactional analysis with better outcomes on behavioral measures; however, these authors found that behavior modification was more prone to leading to poor relationships with the clients. Over time interest faded in Cohen's CASE project Other studies found that in proper supervision of staff in behavior modification facilities could lead to greater use of punishment procedures

Under the leadership of Montrose Wolf, Achievement place, the first Teaching Family Home became the prototype for behavioral programs. Achievement place opened in 1967. Each home has from 6-8 boys in it with two "parents" trained in behavior modification principles. The token system for the program was divided into 3 levels. Outcome studies have found that Achievement place and other teaching family homes reduce recidivism and increase pro-social behavior, as well as self esteem. While initial research suggested the effects of the program only lasted for one year post discharge, recent review of the data suggests the program lasts longer in effect

Gradually, behavior modification /applied behavior analysis within the penal system including residential facilities for delinquent youth lost popularity in the 1970s-1980s due to a large number of abuses (see Cautilli & Weinberg (2007) ), but recent trends in the increase in U.S. crime and recent focus on reduction of recidivism have given such programs a second look . Indeed, because of societal needs the number of youth residential facilities has grown over recent years to close to 39,950 in 2000. The use of functional analysis has been shown to be teachable to staff and able to reduce use of punishment procedures. Rutherford's (2009) review from interviews and archival materials documents the decline from treatment of behavior analysis with criminal justice populations.

One recent acknowledgement has been that long term care does not equate with better outcomes. To reduce the tendency for abuse, a strong push has occurred to certify or license behavior modifiers or to have such practices limited to licensed psychologists. In particular psychologists with behavioral training American psychological association offers a diplomat (post Ph.D. and licensed certification) in behavioral psychology

Often the practice of behavior modification in facilities comes into question (see recent interest in Judge Rotenberg Educational Center, Aspen Education Group and the World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools). Often these types of restrictive issues are discussed as part of ethical and legal standards (see Professional practice of behavior analysis). Recent research has identified some best practices for use in such facilities In general policies in such facilities require the presence of a treatment team to ensure that abuses do not occur especially if facilities are attempting to use punishment programs.