Facilitated Communication is Not Science

Parents, educators, researchers, and others concerned about the promotion of Facilitated Communication, a thoroughly discredited but persistent technique.

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

Q: Why does Soma have to be within visual and auditory range if Tito can spell independently? Look for subtle visual and auditory cues trained over decades of practice. Where's the reliably controlled testing of RPM/S2C? That's the best way to determine authorship.

[ALResearch222 @AlResearch222]

At first glance this looks like he's independently reading the note and responding on a keyboard flat on the table. What cueing is going on or what are we missing? @FCisnotScience
@FCisPsychosis
@DrJerroldCoe re: Soma
https://t.co/tmSNXtI338

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

Oh, that breaks my heart that learning opportunities are missed because of FC/S2C/RPM.

[James T. Todd @jimtemu]

@FCisnotScience The ability to respond based on subtle gestural cues established by incidental social reinforcement suggests the ability to respond to subtle real cues established by incidental social reinforcement. That means significant opportunities for genuine learning are being squandered.

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

That makes sense, plus they're taught not to pay attention to the cues (or that the cues aren't really influencing letter selection). Intending not to interfere with letter selection isn't the same as not interfering with letter selection.

[Presume Facilitator Influence @FCisPsychosis]

@FCisnotScience Yes, and perhaps a new facilitator with a new client eases into ideomotor smoother than a new facilitator with an experienced client? So many reasons as to why facilitators swear they’re not moving the board.

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

Great point.

[James T. Todd @jimtemu]

@FCisnotScience It’s not just a great illusion. It is the greatest magic trick ever created—because it even works on the person doing it

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

Rosemary Crossley and eight or nine of her facilitators were the first in Australia to produce FC-generated false allegations of abuse charges agains the family of one of their clients. See Paul Heinrichs' series on this topic.

https://t.co/KOxhWTjBiY

[Jerry Coe @DrJerroldCoe]

@atbeyond @FCisnotScience @FCisPsychosis @AltB56073878 @annephillipssea @jimtemu You also say this while defending the convicted rapist cult leader Eliezer Berland, so your ethical guidelines are clearly shot.

https://t.co/IZIaL0euy0

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

And also part of the reason she put it behind a paywall. It took me 16 seconds to figure out what was going on. Her test design proved that when facilitators were shown the answers, the FC-generated responses were "correct."

[Jerry Coe @DrJerroldCoe]

@FCisnotScience Might have something to do with why Ky Dickens initially promised "raw footage" of testing in episode 1, and then switched to a "best of" format instead.

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

I think some of the cueing subtleties can be chalked up to facilitator skill and some is due to observers not looking in the right place as the facilitators' cueing occurs (like a magic trick that's obvious if you're not distracted by the theatrics and know where to look).

[Alt B @AltB56073878]

@annephillipssea @FCisPsychosis @FCisnotScience The telepathy demonstrations are also pretty convincing evidence, to those who disfavor paranormal explanations, that cueing can be too subtle to detect yet influential enough to completely control letter selection.

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

I'm wondering if a new facilitator is more self-conscious and, therefore, more aware of their own behaviors than a facilitator who's practiced longer and been taught not to express doubt about the FC-generated messages?

[Presume Facilitator Influence @FCisPsychosis]

@annephillipssea @AltB56073878 @FCisnotScience If you want a facilitator perspective, check out this post, who had a fresh mind and was able to perceive their ideomotor movements with an expert speller as their first client. Maybe their perception is like a frog thrown in boiling water, as opposed to slowly boiled alive.

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

I've seen a video of EB recently. She seems to just hover her finger over the keyboard. It seems the facilitator pushes the keyboard up to meet her finger. What would happen if the facilitator couldn't see the keyboard or it was on a stationary surface

[Alt B @AltB56073878]

@annephillipssea @FCisPsychosis @FCisnotScience I haven’t seen any vids of EB that rise to the level of Tito and Grant Blasko. From what I’ve seen, EB is mainly convincing in the focused look she has when pointing to letters.
Yes, the really subtle dyads are a great example of how reality can be much more amazing than magic.

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

Sometimes the spelling isn't believable because it's so fast and direct--it doesn't give. the facilitators time to process where on the letter board at the person actually touched (in the space between letters, on the wrong letter, etc) especially if the person isn't looking.

[Anne Phillips @annephillipssea]

@AltB56073878 @FCisPsychosis @FCisnotScience I needed to learn how cued spelling is possible. Without Beals, Shane, Todd and Lutz, I would be among the convinced in the “fast and direct” cases.

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

Agreed. It's a great illusion.

[Anne Phillips @annephillipssea]

@AltB56073878 @FCisPsychosis @FCisnotScience Yes, and I think that what sometimes go unsaid is that what some communication partners achieve (Soma and Tito, Elizabeth and Ginny) is actually amazing. The amazing result of many years of practice.

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

The problem from the beginning of FC is the observers' inability to detect facilitator cueing and control. Seeing is believing and visa versa. Even more reason to require authorship testing if people want to pursue the use of facilitator-dependent techniques.

[Alt B @AltB56073878]

@annephillipssea @FCisPsychosis @FCisnotScience David Amaral
Helen Tager-Flusberg
Connie Kasari
Matt Lerner
And the late Bernard Rimland

My sense from what these folks have said is that they think the “spellers” whose cueing they can’t detect don’t need their communication validated thru authorship tests.

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

The first line of defense for this is reliably controlled testing for authorship which current-day supporters of these techniques ignore or refuse to participate in.

[Alt B @AltB56073878]

@annephillipssea @FCisPsychosis @FCisnotScience There are several respected #autism experts who’ve stated that FC works for some ppl: namely, ppl they’ve observed pointing to letters w/o any cueing that they can see. These experts, who aren’t experts in cueing/mentalism & who’ve forgotten psych 101 and naive realism, include:

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

Especially if the comprehension piece is ignored or downplayed (as well as the effect of facilitators' behaviors).

[Anne Phillips @annephillipssea]

@FCisPsychosis @AltB56073878 @FCisnotScience I think there are outlier people who are invulnerable but I do think most people can be convinced that cued spelling = authorship.

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

I think of all the hours wasted on FC/S2C/RPM teaching people to point on cue. That time could be spent building independent skills instead.

[Carla @PatriquinCarla]

@FCisnotScience Usually passionate/compassionate/make a difference types go into trying to teach Severe’s with attitude all can learn, but should be building from ability level.
If many facilitators changed direction structured/STEP by STEP would save themselves cognitive dissidence&make impact.

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

How long were Akhil and his mother filmed before they got a version of a typing session that they felt was good enough to put behind the Telepathy Tapes paywall for people to look at. If those clips reveal obvious cueing from the facilitator, what happens in a live session?

[Alt B @AltB56073878]

“ So we're left with the fast, direct selectors, of whom Akhil seems to be your main (your only?) example. This is where things get interesting. Consider what journalist Elizabeth Weil observed when she watched Akhil in person (from the article I sent you earlier): …”

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

Quite possible. I think the deeper/more complex the convictions in FC and telepathy et al., the less likely they'd be open to evidence that could help them sort out illusion/delusion from more rational explanations for the phenomenon.

[Alt B @AltB56073878]

@FCisnotScience I’m guessing that the subset of facilitators who believe that letterboards are a medium for telepathy, clairvoyance, and other “spiritual gifts” tend to have more mental health issues than those who find this stuff embarrassing.

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

I've heard speculation re: the mental health and/or personality types of facilitators, but I am not aware of any well-designed, facilitator-focused studies. Many people have fallen for the illusion of FC/S2C/RPM. Some may or may not have mental health issues outside the "norm."

[Presume Facilitator Influence @FCisPsychosis]

@jimtemu @AltB56073878 @FCisnotScience @TelepathyTapes I believe it's not weird, it's the norm, and it's part of a bigger mental health issue caused by unfettered misinformation online.

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

A Conversation About Cueing with Someone Involved in the Telepathy Tapes Who Wishes to Remain Anonymous

https://t.co/N0pWcv9NNz

[Facilitated Communication is Not Science @FCisnotScience]

When did the FC Leadership Know about the Fatal Flaws w/their technique - Part 1

https://t.co/zesQ84uChA

[ALResearch222 @AlResearch222]

@FCisnotScience This is great material. Can you provide the link to part one; it's not obvious in the part 2?