Garvey, C. C., Ferguson, J. L., Milne, C., Cihon, J. H., Leaf, J. B., Leaf, R., McEachin, J., & Schulze, K. (2021). Comparing in-view to out-of-view stimulus arrangements when teaching receptive labels for children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 15(2), 475-484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-021-00596-2

 

Reviewed by: Nicole Radilowicz, BCBA and Mary Jane Weiss, PhD, BCBA-D, Endicott College

Why research this topic?

Procedures to teach specific skills for individuals with autismClinicians and educators working with individuals with autism focus on utilizing best practices to efficiently teach new skills to learners. This helps ensure that instruction is efficient and effective. Learners have a right to access effective strategies for learning new skills; making such instructional strategies available is an ethical obligation of practitioners. This article examined and compared the effectiveness of two strategies for teaching individuals with autism to receptively identify objects (e.g., touch an object on request, hand someone an item on request, choose from an array of several objects when asked to identify one). Receptive identification of objects is a fundamental corenerstone language skill, as it is needed to follow directions and to understand more complex language, as well as to use words accurately in expressive communications (e.g., for requesting). One strategy utilizes a barrier to block the learner’s view of the stimuli while the array is set up, while the other strategy arranges the array in front of the learner. The use of the barrier is meant to prevent the learner from paying attention to changes in the way the arrangement is laid out that may affect their responses. Such a strategy is commonly used, but evidence on the need for it is lacking. Hence, this study sought to learn whether the use of a visual barrier helps individuals with autism learn receptive labels.

What did the researchers do?

The participants were three children between 3 years 11 months old and 4 years 6 months old with diagnoses of autism spectrum disorder. All three of the participants had scores in the average or above average range for expressive and receptive language areas. The researchers used an adapted alternating-treatments design to compare the two teaching conditions. Researchers identified targets that would potentially increase the individual’s positive social interactions with peers, and used cartoon characters and sports team logos as targets. In these ways, instruction was made enticing and engaging. Targets were taught either using an in-view condition or an out-of-view condition. The in-view condition consisted of the researchers setting up the array of 3 stimuli with the learner watching. The out-of-view condition consisted of the researchers setting up the array of 3 stimuli behind a barrier, which was then removed to begin the trial set. Three targets were introduced at a time, and items were randomly assigned to either condition. If one condition was shown to be more effective for a learner for the first two training sets, that participant completed the study. If one strategy did not show increased effectiveness, a third training set was completed.

What did the researchers find?

Researchers found that for almost all training sets and participants, the in-view arrangement was more effective or equally as effective for teaching receptive identification of the targets. This showed that, generally speaking, there was no advantage to using a visual barrier. One exception existed, in which the out-of-view condition was more successful (learned in 6 teaching sessions versus 8 teaching sessions for the in-view condition) for trial set 3 for one participant. For both teaching arrangements, all participants met mastery criteria. Overall, there was strong evidence that the in-view arrangement was equally or more effective. A visual barrier was not shown to have utility.

What are the strengths and limitations of the study?

There are strengths and limitations to discuss in regards to this study. The study demonstrated two effective teaching procedures to teach receptive labels to individuals with autism. For most participants and learning sets, the in-view condition was as effective or more effective than the out-of-view condition. Using an in-view procedure allows for targets to be presented more quickly and without the use of additional materials. This could increase the efficiency of teaching this type of task. As far as limitations in the study, internal validity is limited by the absence of a control set, due to the use of an alternating treatments design. In other words, if the researchers had a set that was not taught using either of those strategies, they would have had stronger evidence that the treatments were affecting the change. In addition, stimuli were rotated in view of the learner during probe sessions. Although stimuli were rotated systematically during the probe sessions, the instructor may have provided inadvertent cues to prompt the correct response of the learner. A third limitation of the study is that the participants used all had average to high average IQ scores, strong communication skills, and low levels of interfering behaviors. It would be helpful to see this study replicated with a more diverse group of learners who may present with struggles acquiring recetive identification skills.

What do the results mean?

It is necessary for all clinicians and educators to consider the skills of their learners when implementing teaching strategies. Although the use of a barrier to block the visual of the arrangement of the array during receptive teaching trials can be effective for learners, it may not be necessary to ensure adequate mastery of the skill. In other words, not all learners require this level of assistance, and it may not be universally helpful to use a visual barrier. The learners in this study did not need this level of assistance. The results imply that learners under similar contexts are likely to attend to the important stimuli in the arrangement, and not to extraneous stimuli. All teaching strategies should be considered with respect to the individual learner to ensure that efficient and effective teaching is provided. This study suggests that the use of additional blocking strategies may not be necessary to teach skills to individuals with autism. Individualization of strategies is crucial, and more work should be done to confirm these findings. This study should be replicated to aid confidence in the findings. It will also be important to compare these strategies in learners with lower language abilities; it may be that the strategy affords some advantage to some learners with certain characteristics.

Citation for this article:

Radilowicz, N. & Weiss, M. J. (2023). Research Synopsis: Comparing in-view to out-of-view stimulus arrangements when teaching receptive labels for children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Science in Autism Treatment, 20(6).

Related ASAT Research Synopses: ​

Other Related ASAT Articles: ​

 

#BehaviorAnalysts #Centerbased #Communication #Teachers

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email