Monday, February 20, 2017

B. F. Skinner made scientific discoveries, but Sigmund Freud did not, according to a reading of Karl Popper, philosopher of science. Nevertheless, Skinner was cruel, in subtle ways.

[Edit note to the counter-controllers to the ABA controllers. It's worth the effort to study this. Let me know if it's not clear or if you have questions or need me to elaborate. This is how I completely annihilate Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) in ethics debate. I speak their language fluently and then I say, "Do it to yourself." They never do. The ethics part is simple, in this respect, though there are many other ways to bury them for their flimsy use of ethical methods and aims. That's why they won't talk to me anymore, as they have banned me from their big groups without any specific explanation of what had been my big mortal sin that offended them so much and then they pretend to ignore me as I see them reading my blog in droves when I post to their other minor groups, for example, though Google Stats does not say exactly who does the reading.]

B. F. Skinner made scientific discoveries, but Sigmund Freud did not, according to a reading of Karl Popper, philosopher of science. Nevertheless, Skinner was cruel, in subtle ways.

Popper (1935) maintained an impeccable argument in the first few chapters I read in his "Logic of Scientific Discovery." Then Popper (1962) used his 1938 argument, that what marks science off from non-science is his notion of "falsifiability," to claim that Freudian psychoanalysis was non-scientific.

God might be real, but we can never falsify any argument that says S/He is real. There's no way to disprove it. According to Popper, and others have challenged this part of Popper well, we can never prove a scientific theory. We can only corroborate hypotheses as very well supported by a long history of affirmative results. But if it is possible to falsify a hypothesis, even though the falsification may never occur through repeated tests, then we have science, since here we have falsifiability.

Skinner (1938) showed, by inventing sound-proof operant chambers (which came to be called the Skinner Boxes) where he said he kept constant all potential confounding variables, external noise, for example, that under-weight (hungry) rats will press a lever more often while presses produced food than how often the rats had previously pressed the levers during non-reinforcement baseline conditions. Rate of behavior is the effect, the dependent variable, which was his favorite way to signal behavior strength, or the probability of future responses, or the propensity to behave under similar conditions in the future.

This was falsifiable because if lever press rate did not increase while his device delivered food for lever presses, then this would have falsified or disproven his discovery. But it didn't. He kept on corroborating his thesis with more positive findings the null did not appear.

In human terms, we drive to our favorite Italian restaurant more often (the effect), Italian, for example, more often, because the food we ate there (the cause) satiated our hunger and because we choose this Italian over others, a less favored Chinese restaurant, for one, let's say, when we have such options.

So Skinner discovered what he called the operant conditioning of human and non-human "organisms" as we act to operate upon the environment, and then the environment reacts to the organisms' operations and delivers consequences, presentation and removal of food-type reinforcements in Skinner (1938), and also his punishers added and subtracted, slaps on the paw in this book. The more immediate the consequence, the greater the behavior modification.

Had Skinner's underfed rats pushed a lever while exploring the chamber during the food delivery condition, then if the lever push tripped the chamber's food delivery mechanism, had the rat eaten the pellet, and then if in this hypothetical scenario the rat did not learn, or it did not show a lever press rate increase, as seen if the rate of lever presses had not increased, well then this would have falsified his operant method. Skinner electro-mechanically drew the "cumulative record" line of the behavior curve with an attached a pen stylus that moved up a pip on the paper with each lever push. The pen marked a behavior rate curve over time on a big sheet of paper he mounted on a slowly revolving drum. So Skinner was confident that his rats' activity did not falsify his findings and he tested out his equipment to see what would happen. Skinner was then science, falsifiable, under Popper, philosopher of science. He had said he didn't need a theory to prove or disprove. He just rigged up his tinker toys and saw what the rats did, much to his surprise, no doubt.

On the other hand, psychoanalysis by way of Sigmund Freud claimed to know there were invisible unconscious parts of the psyche, never directly observable, the Id, the primal instincts to go get sex, the Superego, the part of us that gives us guilt and tells us, "You better not do anything naughty," and the Ego, which I suppose is the place where we work out the conflict between Id and Superego. Since we can never directly observe these parts of the unconscious mind, however, though they might be real, as God might be real, we can never disprove or falsify Freud's internal structures, and neither can we falsify the existence of a God who may or may not exist.

So Freud is not science, but Skinner is, according to deduction, rather than induction, the usual way scientists present their systems (more on this later).


Ethically, conditioning is like a gun. Just because we know how to do it, that does not mean we should. ABA uses this knowledge in a by-any-means-necessary highly-unethical manner to reach what it calls its "effective results," which we know is the forced submission of autistics to pass as non-autistic, just as gays can pass as non-gay and conceal their identities, pretending to be non-gay and suffering trauma for it. Behavior control is a way of life for them. An actually autistic special education teacher this month has confirmed what I've suspected for a long time, namely high rates of divorce among the ABA crews she knows throughout North Jersey where she works. It should be obvious that those who live a lifestyle of behavioral control and manipulation unquestioned in its ethical flaws, because the cult silences dissent from within and refuses to hear its actually autistic survivor criticisms, are going to try to modify their husbands behaviors and not let on how intensely she can do it until after she owns her big rock attached to her mid fingers. The poor guys. Hey dudes. If you're reading this and your pal is dating a student of ABA, do him a big favor. Jeez. Show him this post before she lures him in with phony charms and all kinds of desirous reinforcers that you heteros can figure out what kinds of alluring pleasures she give him before the marriage, only to withhold them to make him obey her commands, after the honeymoon is all spent dry and the roses have wilted not so fresh as a daisy any more.

Friday, February 17, 2017

News from 2016 to 2017 shows precisely how violent a place is Canton, Massachusetts' Applied Behavior Analysis Judge Rotenberg Center of extremely painful electric skin shock.

News from 2016 to 2017 shows precisely how violent a place is Canton, Massachusetts' Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) Judge Rotenberg Center (JRC) of extremely painful electric ABA skin shock.

Norfolk County District Attorney Morrissey (2016) Press Release: Two plead not guilty to beating disabled man in their care (one with a belt).

Cotter (2106): State investigating abuse claims against Judge Rotenberg employees.


[Note to the next two articles: It’s well known in the community of academics that aggression provokes counter-aggression. The Judge Rotenberg Center of extremely painful ABA skin shock is extremely and harshly aggressive. These victims have no good way to defend themselves, no doubt. They fight, but JRC convinces prosecutors to go after ABA's JRC victims who also become aggressive. Whose aggression is worse? Those who are angry or those who attack the anger they provoke?]

Shepard (2016): Judge Rotenberg Center resident charged with assault in Stoughton.

Shepard (2017): Two Rotenberg Center students charged with assaulting Stoughton staff.


JRC is an ABA institution. This is what ABA calls "effective treatment." See as ABA calls skin shock "effective." 

At its annual conventions for at least the past four years, the Ass. of Behavior Analysis International (ABAI), Maria Malott CEO, continuously and officially has been approving JRC as being "aligned" with ABAI's "mission," even though the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network condemned ABAI for their all out support of skin shock there.

This is ABA's chief international skin shock "torture" supporter Maria Malott's picture:

All ABA so-called "professionals," as long as they are not doing non-aversive Positive Behavior Support (PBS), which is not ABA, which is different from ABA in many ways, all these pseudo-professionals who claim they help people but don't outright support or else are silently complicit to this "torture."

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Méndez (2013, p. 85) called ABA's Rotenberg Center a place of "torture."

JRC Director Crookes (2012, p. 2, par. 3) admitted her people put her skin shock electrodes on her victims' buttocks. The buck stops with the executive in charge as President Harry S. Truman said that the buck stops with the executive in charge.  Her name is Glenda Crookes. She is responsible. This is her picture. You can supposedly write to her at her Linked In profile if you join the service. Please give her a piece of your mind, but don't harass her and don't threaten her with anything that's illegal or unethical.

This is what Malott and Crookes call "the right to effective behavioral treatment." Watch:


Related posts:  

Kosovskaya and Altieri (June 11, 2015): Anna Kosovskaya escapes the Judge Rotenberg Center (JRC) of ABA electroshock "torture."

Altieri (March 31, 2016): ABA is abuse. Reward and Consent's (R+C's) Cognitive Behavioral Teaching (CBT) method is a viable alternative. It uses dual parent AND child consent.

Altieri (November 24, 2016): An actually autistic man defines and explains ABA.

Altieri (January 24, 2017): Here's some happy news from Germany. A generous lottery group, Aktion Mensch, defunds ABA programs.

Altieri (February 16, 2017): ABA Leaks uncovers ABA's Judge Rotenberg Center (JRC) skin shockers alleged death number seven: An unborn baby.

Thursday, February 16, 2017

ABA Leaks finds the seventh death with Canton, Massachusetts Rotenberg school of extremely painful Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) electro skin shock torture was an unborn baby of a seventeen-year-old girl, according to the Massachusetts Disabled Persons Protection Commission. Yet we have many Christian ABAers.

[Revised September 10, 2017. DA]

Mrs. Glenda P. Crookes, Executive Director of Massachusetts' Judge Rotenberg Center (JRC) of extremely painful Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA) electric skin shock "torture."

On February 7, 2005 the seventh death with Canton, Massachusetts' Judge Rotenberg Center (JRC) of extremely painful Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) electric skin shock "torture" occurred. The body was an unborn baby of a seventeen-year-old girl, as confirmed by ABA Leaks in a phone call with a representative of Massachusetts Disabled Persons Protection Commission (DPPC).

In 2015 DPPC sent ABA Leaks' Freedom of Information Act journalist Evan Anderson a spreadsheet of 410 serious abuse allegations taking place inside the JRC in a recent ten year history, averaging one charge every ten days, including sexual abuse and burns from their ABA skin shock devices. 

The information on line 6 of the spreadsheet most likely comes from one of the Commission's intake forms dated February 7, 2005. The end of the line says, "Alv was 7 months pregnant. Alv was assaulted by an aggressive client and fell. Alv was brought to a hospital by ambulance after hemorrhaging all over the floor. It appears that alv lost the baby." Column D identifies the "program city" as Canton, Massachusetts. Column L and M say the case was referred to the Norfolk County District Attorney in Massachusetts.

A DPPC attorney told ABA Leaks founder David Altier(i) on the telephone that the mother was seventeen years old. He could not verify for certain whether or not she lost the baby. The Norfolk County District Attorney's office could not confirm it on the telephone either. The person there told Altieri that ABA Leaks needs to send a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the office. ABA Leaks is looking for another FOIA request volunteer to take this next step to find out if the girl did, in fact, lose her baby.

So why, then, does it seems like a pregnant teenager was allowed to live in that place of ABA "abuse and torture"? Aggression is known to cause counter-aggression. JRC aggressively uses extremely painful electric skin shock. It is an ABA institution.

Have there been other unreported ABA/JRC deaths? How many? Quentin Davies (2014) cited all six known ABA/JRC deaths to date in his article "Prisoners of the apparatus." Davies said, 
Shocks have been used at JRC for an incredibly wide variety of behaviors. Although JRC claims that the intention is to stop self-harming or violent behaviors, it also has shocked students for many other things, including: involuntary body movements, waving hands, blocking out sound overstimulation by putting their fingers in their ears, wrapping their foot around the leg of their chair, tensing up their body or fingers, not answering staff quickly enough (xxx), screaming while being shocked, closing their eyes for more than 15 seconds, reacting in fear to other students being shocked, standing up, asking to use the bathroom, raising their hand (Miller), popping their own pimple, leaving a supervised area without asking, swearing, saying “no” (Ahern and Rosenthal 13), stopping work for more than 10 seconds, interrupting others, nagging, whispering, slouching, tearing up paper, and attempting to remove electrodes from their skin (Ahern and Rosenthal 20-21). Additionally, students are shocked for having 5 verbal behaviors in an hour. These behaviors can include talking to oneself, clearing one’s throat, crying, laughing, humming, repeating oneself, or “inappropriate tone of voice” (xxx). A former JRC teacher recalled how “one girl, who was blind, deaf, and non-verbal was moaning and rocking. Her moaning was like a cry. The staff shocked her for moaning. Turned out she had a broken tooth. Another child had an accident in the bathroom and was shocked” (Ahern and Rosenthal 3). The behaviors that JRC considers punishable by shocking are also discovered by surveillance footage, with shocks then administered after the fact. Shock has even been used as a threat to pressure students to say positive things about JRC in front of the state legislature (Berrington). Non-speaking students tend to be subjected to shock the most, and are the ones who often have a more difficult time speaking up about their abuse (xxx).


The United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Juan E. Méndez (2013, p. 85) said,
Therefore and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Special Rapporteur determines that the rights of the students of the JRC (Judge Rotenberg Center) subjected to Level III Aversive Interventions by means of electric shock and physical means of restraints have been violated under the UN Convention against Torture and other international standards.

This is what ABA/JRC has done:

Related links

Please "like" and rate our ABA Leaks Facebook page.

Altieri (first published April 29, 2017). ABA has a Terrible Timeline it will never publish and here it is.

Altieri (April 13, 2016). The Association for Behavior Analysis International officially "approved" extremely painful ABA electric skin shock "torture" once again, after autistic advocates demanded they stop approving it.

Altieri (May 4, 2016). The Massachusetts Disabled Persons Protection Commission sends ABA Leaks a database of 410 severe abuse allegations at Rotenberg in a recent ten-year time span, averaging one charge per every ten days.

Altieri (June 28, 2016). The "data" is in. Each and every ABA pseudo-professional cult member completely supports or is complicit to ABA's extremely painful electric skin shock "torture." Establishing argument: ABA is different from Positive Behavior Support (PBS), despite some overlap. PBS rules out ABA punitive techniques as unnecessary and therefore unethical. However, PBS does punish in practice, despite its theoretical claims that it doesn't.

Altieri (November 24, 2016). An actually autistic man defines and explains ABA.

Altieri (March 18, 2017). ABA did it to gays. They still do it to autistics. We call it false behavioral conversion therapy. It causes us Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, indisputably.

Copyright and disclaimers

Reward and Consent , © is January 15, 2007 to the current date. All rights reserved (and stuff like that). E-mail me for permission to reproduce in part or in full. Please link to and cite passages quoted or paraphrased from here.

Reward and Con
sent is not responsible for links on the site. For example, I use keywords "Operant Conditioning" in the YouTube search field for the videos displayed below the archives on the left. Google selects the videos and the results change from time to time. Please email me if anything is not educational and germane to the subject and I will reevaluate the search.

I am an advocate for people with disabilities certified to teach special education with a Master of Arts in Teaching. I am not a Licensed Psychologist or a Board Certified Behavior Analyst. When in doubt, seek the advice of an MD, a PhD, or a BCBA. My ability to analyze the ethics of ABA stems from the fact that I am disabled and ABA interventions are often done to people like me, which I voluntarily accept, but only when I alone am the person granting consent, and not a parent, sibling, guardian, or institution.