The Persistence of Fad Interventions in the Face of Negative Scientific Evidence: Facilitated Communication for Autism As a Case Example
Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention ISSN: 1748-9539 (Print) 1748-9547 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tebc20 The persistence of fad interventions in the face of negative scientific evidence: Facilitated communication for autism as a case example Scott O. Lilienfeld, Julia Marshall, James T. Todd & Howard C. Shane To cite this article: Scott O. Lilienfeld, Julia Marshall, James T. Todd & Howard C. Shane (2014) The persistence of fad interventions in the face of negative scientific evidence: Facilitated communication for autism as a case example, Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 8:2, 62-101, DOI: 10.1080/17489539.2014.976332 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17489539.2014.976332 Published online: 02 Feb 2015. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 5252 View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 1 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tebc20 Download by: [University of Lethbridge] Date: 05 October 2015, At: 05:52 Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 2014 Vol. 8, No. 2, 62–101, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17489539.2014.976332 EBP Advancement Corner The persistence of fad interventions in the face of negative scientific evidence: Facilitated communication for autism as a case example Scott O. Lilienfeld1, Julia Marshall1, James T. Todd2 & Howard C. Shane3 1Department of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA, 2Department of Psychology, Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, MI, USA, 3Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA ................................................................................................................................................. Abstract Communication disorder and mental health professionals may assume that once novel clinical techniques have been refuted by research, they will be promptly abandoned.
[Show full text]