Professional papers authored by JRC staff and/or consultants
NOTE: All paper titles linked below are PDFs; the journal links go to their websites.
This JRC report details three additional students not covered in the earlier Seven Case Studies… paper, names the positive-only programs that expel their difficult-to-treat students, and gives documentary support for the assertions made in the Seven Case Studies… paper.
The Journal of Behavior Analysis of Offender and Victim – Treatment and Prevention, Volume 2, Number 1, p20-36, (2010). This paper takes up seven cases of students who were expelled from programs that use positive-only treatment procedures, and who were then successfully treated with the GED at JRC.
The Journal of Behavior Analysis of Offender and Victim – Treatment and Prevention, Volume 1, Number 4, p119-166, (2008). This paper shows that treatment of aggression with the GED at JRC is effective in 100% of cases, whereas treatment of aggression with positive-only procedures has proven effective in only 50% of the cases. By “effective”, we mean that the frequency at the end of the baseline period was compared with the frequency at the end of the treatment period.
Research in Developmental Disabilities (2007), doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2007.08.005 RIDD-635 (abstract). This article shows that the side effects of the GED are either nonexistent or positive.
The International Journal of Psychology & Behavior Analysis, 3(121), p 1-14. The risks and benefits of antipsychotic medication and contingent skin shock are enumerated and compared. The results suggest that contingent skin shock is by far the most effective procedure and has the most favorable side effect profile.