Degli Espinosa F, Wolff K, Hewett S. A comparison of two teaching procedures to establish generalized intraverbal-tacting in children with autism.
J Appl Behav Anal 2021;
54:1468-1487. [PMID:
34289112 DOI:
10.1002/jaba.869]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2020] [Revised: 06/30/2021] [Accepted: 06/30/2021] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
Previous research has investigated generalized intraverbal-tacting by teaching children with autism to respond using autoclitic frames. The present study compared the effectiveness and efficiency of a Frame and a No Frame procedure across counterbalanced stimulus sets with 4 children with autism. In the Frame condition, children were taught to respond using autoclitic frames (e.g., "Shape square," "Number two," "Color green," "It's mummy," "S/he is drinking") corresponding to the verbal antecedent ("What shape?", "What number?", "What color?", "Who is it?", "What is s/he doing?"). In the No Frame condition, intraverbal-tacting was established without the autoclitic frame. Irrespective of stimuli employed, 2 children acquired intraverbal-tacting only in the Frame condition. The other 2 children acquired intraverbal-tacting in both conditions, with the Frame procedure requiring fewer teaching trials for 1 child and producing greater generalization for the other. Implications for clinical practice and the role of additive intraverbal stimulus control of autoclitic frames are discussed.
Collapse