ABA Inside Track: Episode 299 – Collaborative Problem Solving

Podcast Hosts: Robert (Rob) Perry Crews, Diana, Jackie
Air Date: January 22, 2025

Episode Overview

This episode explores Collaborative Problem Solving (CPS)—a therapeutic approach primarily developed to address challenging, oppositional, or emotional behaviors in children, often those diagnosed with Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD). The panel reviews seminal and recent research, key concepts, practical frameworks (like the "baskets"), and the overlap (and tension) between the CPS framework and more traditional behavior analytic methods. They also reflect on the practicalities of implementation, the marketing of psychological methods, and ways behavior analysts could learn from and contribute to this approach.

Key Topics & Insights

1. What Is Collaborative Problem Solving (CPS)?

(Intro through ~[06:58])

• CPS Origins:
  • Developed by Dr. Ross Greene (author of The Explosive Child) and J. Stuart Ablon, with much work based out of Massachusetts General Hospital’s Think:Kids program.
• Main Idea:
  • Focuses on the notion that challenging behavior is due to lagging skills (especially in emotional regulation, frustration tolerance, problem-solving, and flexibility), not willful misconduct.
  • Shifts the lens from "compliance" to “skill-building” and “collaborative relationships,” reducing the blame placed on children.
• Core Question:
  • “Is collaborative problem solving truly ‘behavior analytic’?” The hosts explore how operant learning may or may not be explicitly recognized within CPS, but also how the approach dovetails with behavioral ideas.

Memorable Quote:

“...some of the skill-based focus on dealing with or working with children who had sort of more ADHD or highly emotional problem behavior—so really looking at it as a means of discussing lacking skills, rather than blaming children.”
—Rob, [01:24]

2. Early CPS Research and Theoretical Framework

([06:58]–[29:48])

Green & Ablon, 2003: Transactional Model of ODD

• ODD Detailed:
  • Defined as a “recurrent pattern of ... defiant, disobedient, and hostile behavior toward authority figures” ([09:51]).
  • Key symptoms: temper outbursts, persistent stubbornness, resistance to directions, testing limits, and minor aggression.
• Comorbidity & Prevalence:
  • High co-occurrence with Tourette’s (~65%).
  • In the general population, ODD may be present in 2–16%.
• Review of Traditional Approaches:
  • Behavioral (parent training): Emphasizes positive/contingent reinforcement & time-out but often yields poor fidelity in real-world settings.
  • Cognitive approaches: Emphasize antecedents like frustration/emotion regulation.
• CPS as a Synthesis:
  • Combines the above; focuses on reciprocal adult–child relations (a “transactional model,” though the hosts note that this isn’t carried forward as a label).
• CPS Goals for Adults:
  1. Understand ODD as a skills-based disability.
  2. Recognize three basic strategies (“baskets”):
     • Basket A: Imposing adult will,
     • Basket B: Collaborative problem solving,
     • Basket C: Dropping the expectation.
  3. Recognize the interactional impact of each.
  4. Become proficient at using CPS to resolve disagreements.

Notable moment:

“They want us to understand that it’s different from other approaches because the adult and the child need to work together collaboratively.”
—Diana, [26:08]

CPS In Practice: “Baskets” Explained

• Basket A: Holds non-negotiable demands (where adults must hold the line).
• Basket B: The heart of CPS—collaborative, skill-building conversations.
• Basket C: Expectations that can safely be let go.
• Key: The approach is not dogmatically committed to always using Basket B; the choice depends on the need/safety/context.

Behavior analytic parallels: Both antecedent arrangements and skill training are similar, although the CPS literature sometimes distances itself from operant methods.

3. How CPS Actually Works

([29:48]–[38:43])

• From Books to Intervention:
  • The Explosive Child and Treating Explosive Kids provide practical scripts for families.
• CPS Procedure:
  • Identify instances of challenging behavior.
  • Use tools like the “Thinking Skills Inventory” (Wang et al., 2018) to pinpoint lagging skills in areas such as executive function, social/emotional regulation, flexibility, etc.
  • Move into “Plan B”: Adults and children discuss both perspectives, define the problem, and collaboratively devise solutions or compromises, which are then trialed and refined.
  • Emphasis is on helping children “do well if they can” (Greene’s motto).
  • CPS APT assessment (Advance Plan for Treatment/Antecedent–Problem mapping) bears resemblance to ABA’s antecedent–behavior–consequence (ABC) charts.
• Noted Tensions:
  • The CPS approach sometimes “digs” at behavior analytic tradition by insisting its method does not use reinforcement/punishment, though panelists argue that skill development and problem-solving are operant behaviors in essence.

4. Recent Empirical Evidence: Applications & Outcomes

([38:43]–[57:12])

A. CPS in Outpatient Settings (Pilastri et al., 2023)

(Summary by Jackie)

• Design:
  • Pre/post analysis of 120 families (children ages 3–19, mean 8.7 years) at an academic outpatient center (likely Mass General).
  • Sessions focused on parent–child communication around identified challenges and lagging skills; mostly involved parents, sometimes children.
• Key Measures:
  • All assessments were via parent/child questionnaires, not direct observation.
• Results:
  • 19% "recovered," 12% improved, 62% unchanged, 7% deteriorated at three-month follow-up.
  • Many children discontinued treatment early; reasons unclear, could be due to burden, lack of perceived progress, etc.
  • Parent-reported “parenting skills” often improved.
  • A strong theme: Treatment may have higher acceptability and fidelity than ABA-based parent training, even if direct effects are similar.

“I think these articles really just show us how we can be better and...maybe collaborate with other fields...We can teach [CPS folks] how to observe behavior...and they can teach us how to work better with families in a more approachable way.”
—Jackie, [61:28]

B. CPS as an Alternative to Traditional “Point & Level” Systems in Residential Care (Stol et al., 2023)

(Summary by Rob; [49:32] and onward)

• Context:
  • Youth residential settings commonly use universal “point & level” systems (token economy but non-individualized), which are often impersonal and ineffective for skill-building.
• Transition to CPS (plus trauma-informed CBT):
  • Leadership focused on staff training, gradual rollout, and staff safety concerns.
• Results:
  • Decreases in monthly restraints per quarter—a key safety measure.
  • CPS viewed as more trauma-informed, respectful, and conducive to relationship-building.
• Behavior Analyst Critique:
  • CPS literature sometimes characterizes ABA as inflexible or reliant solely on external rewards/punishments, which the hosts argue misrepresents the full spectrum of behavior-analytic interventions.

“CPS teaches staff the limitations of operant approaches and an effective intervention that gets behavioral expectations met without rewards and punishments, while also building skills and relationships—which is such a failure of understanding operant behavior...Using collaborative problem solving doesn't not make it operant behavior.”
—Rob, [55:38]

5. Synthesis, Reflections, and Calls to Action

(Dissemination Station: [60:14]–End)

Behavior Analysts' Takeaways

• Appreciation for CPS:
  • Easy to market and widely liked, CPS is as effective as traditional approaches and more acceptable to consumers—often the decisive factor in long-term success.
  • Panelists agree that “behavior analysis could help” by bringing more precise measurement and direct observation to CPS research/practice.
• Room for Collaboration:
  • “If you have two treatments that are exactly the same in terms of effectiveness and people like one more, that one wins the contest.” —Rob, [64:07]
  • Both fields could benefit: Behavior analysis could use more accessible marketing/presentation, and CPS could gain from objective measurement and direct skill analysis.
• Acknowledgment of Gaps:
  • The hosts reflect on ABA’s historic communication and marketing failings, and the need to better interface with other disciplines.
  • They also highlight the importance of being consumer-friendly and focusing on skills families want to build.

Notable Quotes

• “We haven’t done a great job of explaining our science to other scientists.” —Jackie, [56:24]
• “We could do better. But I think what their point is is that maybe people didn't like the things that were happening before because we as behavior analysts didn't really validity until recently in a way that was understandable.” —Jackie, [63:28]

Timestamps for Major Discussion Segments

• 00:00–03:35: Introductions and episode context
• 04:48–29:48: Deep dive into foundational CPS research (Green & Ablon 2003/2004; “basket” framework)
• 29:48–38:43: How CPS actually works—books, tools, Plan B
• 38:43–47:24: Review of CPS in outpatient settings (Pilastri et al. 2023)
• 49:32–59:59: CPS replacing point/level systems in residential care (Stol et al. 2023)
• 60:14–68:01: Dissemination Station—synthesis, practical implications, and interdisciplinary collaboration

Conclusion & Recommendations

• CPS offers a proactive, skills-based, collaborative alternative to more consequence-driven or compliance-based interventions.
• Acceptability and fidelity are central to its appeal and success.
• ABA professionals could enhance CPS research with objective data collection and support collaborative, consumer-driven interventions for a wide variety of needs, not just for autism.
• There is ample opportunity for dialogue and cooperation between the fields—if both are humble and open to learning from one another.

“If any one field thinks they have the answers, they clearly don't. No one field is just going to solve all the problems. More interdisciplinary collaboration...this one should be easy—psychology, behavior analysis. That’s not that far off.”
—Rob, [67:00]