Thanks for the questions @behavioralintervention.
I am very familiar with the Social Thinking program by Michelle Garcia Winner and her colleagues. I use her materials in a lot of my direct instruction teaching of youth with various social-communication difficulties. I think of it more as a curriculum versus a treatment package. While the Social Thinking package in isolation is not considered an evidence-based practice, it is based on evidence and research in the area of social cognition. It would be hard to tease out the curriculum effects from the teaching effects as many instructional methods and resources are used (e.g., cartooning, role play and rehearsal, social scripting and narratives, priming, practice and feedback, etc.) - some of which are behaviour analytic in nature.
Overall, I think it is a good curriculum that can be applied as part of the social skills teachings provided to our learners. What I find missing in a lot of social skills programming/teaching is the emphasis on the contextual cues. The subtle differences in the environment result in a different set of behaviours that are expected and acceptable given the context. The Social Thinking materials (and others e.g., Social Stories) hit on these aspects. It gets away from the rule-based learning of social skills (“I have to share with my friends”) and attempts to present the why of social skills - related to the context (which is antecedent in nature) and the perspectives of others (which is consequential in nature). However, a social behaviour still has to “work” or be reinforced in order to be learned. I try to bring attention to the naturally occurring sources of reinforcement (if they are indeed reinforcing to our learner) through feedback; however, additional reinforcers and self-monitoring might be necessary in the beginning stages of teaching. These would eventually be faded in favour of the reinforcement which can be delivered by peers in the natural environment.