Social Thinking®: Science, Pseudoscience, or Antiscience?

Behav Anal Pract. 2016 Jan 26;9(2):152-7. doi: 10.1007/s40617-016-0108-1. eCollection 2016 Jun.

Abstract

Today, there are several interventions that can be implemented with individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Most of these interventions have limited to no empirical evidence demonstrating their effectiveness, yet they are widely implemented in home, school, university, and community settings. In 1996, Green wrote a chapter in which she outlined three levels of science: evidence science, pseudoscience, and antiscience; professionals were encouraged to implement and recommend only those procedures that would be considered evidence science. Today, an intervention that is commonly implemented with individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder is Social Thinking®. This intervention has been utilized by behaviorists and non-behaviorists. This commentary will outline Social Thinking® and provide evidence that the procedure, at the current time, qualifies as a pseudoscience and, therefore, should not be implemented with individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, especially given the availability of alternatives which clearly meet the standard of evidence science.

Keywords: Applied behavior analysis; Autism; Evidence based; Social behavior; Social thinking.