Comparative Analysis of Gender-Based Differences in Behavioral Mastery, Goals, and Characteristics in Autistic Individuals: An Applied Behavior Analysis Study
Tami Peterson,Jessica Dodson,Robert Sherwin,Frederick Strale Jr
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.62427
2024-06-15
Cureus
Abstract:Introduction It is widely recognized that the prevalence and diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are more common in males than in females. Despite this, there is a significant gap in the body of autism research that investigates gender differences for treatment effects of applied behavior analysis (ABA) across a variety of measured variables. This research aims to comprehensively evaluate gender distinctions concerning target behavioral objectives, goals, and deficit variables. Materials and methods This study analyzed retrospective data from 100 participants, including 89 juveniles and four adults, with seven cases lacking age documentation, who underwent a three-month ABA program from March 19 to June 11, 2023. The ABA program included various methodologies such as functional analysis, discrete trial training, mass trials, and naturalistic training. Data on outcome measures, including target behavioral proficiency, age, average trials to proficiency, average teaching days to proficiency, open behavioral objectives, and target trends, were collected using the "Catalyst" software (Catalyst Software Corporation, New York, NY). Participant demographics were summarized using statistical analyses for categorical (gender and race/ethnicity) and continuous variables (percentage of mastered behavioral objectives, age, average trials, average teaching days, open objectives, percentage of failed objectives during maintenance, percentage of objectives with upward, downward, and flat trends). These statistics included mean, standard deviation, median, and range and were analyzed inferentially using nine separate two-sample independent t-tests and corresponding effect sizes using Cohen's d. Results There were no statistically significant disparities based on gender (p > 0.05) across all nine variables examined: Percentage of Targets Mastered, Age, Average Trials to Mastery, Average Teaching Days to Mastery, Open Targets, Percentage of Targets Failed in Maintenance, Percentage of Targets Trending Up, Percentage of Targets Trending Down, and Percentage of Targets Trending Flat, and wide confidence intervals were detected. Conclusions Non-significant gender differences in response to ABA treatments regarding these nine behavioral goals, mastery, and deficit variables may be relevant. They suggest that ABA treatments could be equally beneficial for both male and female autistic individuals. These results should be interpreted cautiously. The general pattern observed, characterized by broad confidence intervals, carries a degree of statistical uncertainty, which may suggest substantial gender differences. These results might question the prevailing beliefs about the variation in treatment response based on gender. This could profoundly impact clinical practices, implying that healthcare professionals should not favor one gender over another when suggesting ABA therapies. Instead, the treatment advice should be tailored to each child's unique requirements and traits, regardless of gender. The investigators expect these results to encourage additional research in this field. Comprehending the elements that affect treatment response is vital for improving treatment results and customizing care.