The four responses in the December issue of Mental Retardation to my earlier article (Sturmey, 2005a) are interesting and welcome. I offer the following comments in reply.

Beail (2005) commented that my conclusion that behavioral treatments are to be preferred was incorrect because the outcome literature on behavioral treatments is limited. Specifically, he noted that Didden, Duker, and Korzelis' (1997) finding that the participants in the majority of studies in their meta-analysis were, on average, 16 years of age; usually people with severe and profound mental retardation; and commonly exhibited self-injury or stereotypy; few had mental health problems; the range of intervention methods included 25% of investigators using aversive methods; and many took place in institutional settings. Further, many studies had methodological limitations, such as lack of functional analyses, no use of least intrusive alternatives, limited reporting of generalization data, and employment...

You do not currently have access to this content.