We, as a point of fact, weren’t given the choice. ABA was the only option presented to us out here in podunk Queens. But we ended up being very lucky — we had an ABA instructor who was not really ABA at all, so his interactions with our son were actually more of a combination of the 2.

One therapist said: “Unfortunately most people really do think that aba = discrete trial teaching which is what you are describing, and as you mentioned not great examples of it. So ABA has become synonymous with working with kids on the spectrum when in actuality it is a science based on the principles of learning to change behavior to a socially significant degree. It really doesn’t have anything specifically to do with special education, rather is has been scientifically and empirically supported to be effective with that and many other populations. That is the issue with floortime, it doesn’t have that scientific rigor behind it. However good DTT teachers will use what looks like floortime for naturalistic teaching. So there can actually be little difference in the two sessions, outside of data.”

Another therapist said: “Early intensive behavioral intervention using ABA has received the greatest scientific scrutiny of all the intervention choices for autism and has become a treatment of choice for many parents and professionals. This is true for both traditional and naturalistic ABA. However, because there is no standard for the level of experience and training for ABA providers, problematic situations sometimes arise where an ABA therapist is not well-trained in ABA and furthermore, does not have adequate knowledge about child development and how to work with the early childhood population.”