Comparison of behavioral intervention and sensory integration therapy on challenging behavior of children with autism

Lydon et al. (2017) compared two treatments for challenging behavior in children with autism.

Ten children got both behavioral intervention and sensory-integration therapy in an alternating design.

The team tracked how often each child hit, screamed, or bolted during every session.

Behavioral intervention dropped problem behavior to near zero for nine of the ten kids.

Sensory therapy kept rates higher and jumpy across all children.

The clear winner was the behavioral package that used functional assessment and reinforcement.

Matson et al. (2009) reviewed pills for the same behaviors and found tiny gains. Their warning to try behavioral methods first matches what Lydon showed in practice.

McIntyre (2020) moves the same behavioral tools into parent-training at home. Lydon proves the child-level piece works, giving parent programs a solid base to build on.

Hawkins (1982) also used quick alternations with autistic kids, but targeted play instead of disruption. Both studies show single-case designs can spot winners fast.

You now have direct evidence that sensory-integration therapy is the weaker choice. Start every new case with a brief functional assessment and a behavioral plan. If a family asks about sensory rooms, show them these data and keep the focus on reinforcement. You should see faster drops in problem behavior and fewer wasted sessions.