Children with autism have deficits in social interactions and verbal and nonverbal communication and engagement in rigid and repetitive activities and/or interests (ASA, 2008). A joint attention (JA) repertoire has been identified as a behavioral cusp for later social development and thus, JA deficits serve as an early indicator for diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (Vismara & Lyons, 2007; Whalen & Schbreibman, 2003). A JA repertoire consists of both responses to- and initiations for-bids for coordinated attention. Previous research has shown teaching strategies such as pivotal response and discrete trial training for joint attention skills to be effective (Vismara & Lyons, 2007; Whalen & Schreibman, 2003). The purpose of the current study was to evaluate a mixture of pivotal response and discrete trial training as an intervention method for training joint attention behaviors with children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder in a home setting. In addition, this study evaluated the effects of interspersing targets during training and incorporated generalization probes to assess JA initiations in the form of shifting eye gaze and pointing. Lastly this study examined a parent training procedure to determine if it would promote maintenance after skill acquisition. Results show that all targets were acquired when taught simultaneously. The results show that 2 of the 3 participants made JA initiations during probes throughout intervention. Lastly, the results indicated that parent training did not help maintain JA responding for participant one.

Behavioral Skills Training (BST) is an evidence-based practice used to teach a wide variety of skills to different populations (Erhard et al., 2019; Parson et al., 2012; Reed et al., 2018; Tomlinso et al., 2018). BST can be used to perform Discrete-trial teaching (DTT), which is an effective teaching procedure that simplifies teaching for children with developmental disabilities and helps to expand their repertoires (Sarokoff & Sturmey, 2004). In the past, virtual-BST, which is a cost-effective and convenient method (LeBlanc et al., 2020; Tomlinson et al., 2018), has been used to teach individuals how to implement Applied Behavior Analysis interventions (Rios et al., 2020). The purpose of the current study was to compare the effectiveness of in-person BST and virtual BST to train three caregivers and three behavior technicians to implement DTT with children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Using a multiple baseline across participants design, results of the current study indicated that, after the introduction of BST, participants in both groups (i.e., in-person BST and virtual BST) showed a high improvement in DTT implementation skills compared to baseline. Findings suggest that both modalities of BST are effective methods for training individuals on how to implement DTT.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Previous research has evaluated error correction procedures to assess their effectiveness, yet few studies have evaluated preferences for these procedures. An alternating treatments design was used to compare the effects of four error correction procedures: model, single response repetition (SRR), multiple response repetition (MRR), and single response repetition with an embedded distracter trial (SRR-D), on the acquisition of sight words for three adolescent males. Preference for the procedures was assessed by using a concurrent chains procedure consisting of forced choice and free choice presentations. Results demonstrated that all participants performed best with a specific error correction procedure. Participant 1 showed a moderate preference for his most effective error correction procedure. Participant 2 demonstrated a slight preference for the SRR procedure which did not correlate with his most effective error correction procedure, SRR-D, and participant 3 did not demonstrate preference for any of the procedures. These findings suggest that error correction procedures should be evaluated and individualized for each learner. Although a moderate preference for a procedure was demonstrated with only one participant, future research should continue to use and refine these procedures to incorporate learner preference in all teaching strategies. / Teaching & Learning

Measuring procedural fidelity helps behavior analysts assess staff performance and make decisions about a treatment's effectiveness. However, there is limited research comparing different methods of measuring procedural fidelity. Therefore, we systematically replicated a study that examined how procedural fidelity of discrete-trial-instruction sessions varies depending on the measurement system and calculation. We scored videos depicting behavior technicians conducting discrete-trial instruction with a child with autism and did not permit data collectors to pause, rewind, or fast-forward to simulate a live session. Specifically, we compared individual-component and global fidelity from the occurrence/nonoccurrence method and all-or-nothing by component method. Like previous research has demonstrated, our findings indicated that global values were likely to mask component errors, whereas the all-or-nothing by component method was less likely to do so. When data collected in the current study was compared to those in previous research, interobserver agreement was high for both occurrence/nonoccurrence and all-or-nothing by component methods. Overall, the procedural-fidelity values obtained from each study differed minimally. These results suggest that both measurement methods yield consistent results whether derived from recorded sessions with the ability to pause, rewind, and fast-forward or simulated live sessions. Differences that were obtained are discussed in detail with particular emphasis on connecting our findings to the utility of procedural-fidelity assessment in practice.

This study was conducted to examine professional development techniques for training special education teachers to implement discrete trial training with in the classroom environment. The purpose of this study was to determine if professional development regarding discrete trail training increases the fidelity with which teachers implement discrete trail training when providing instruction to students with autism spectrum disorder. Specifically, the study noted if professional development that included coaching in the classroom increased the fidelity with which teachers were able to implement discrete trail training. Further, this study examined the correlation between an improvement in the fidelity with which teachers implemented discrete trail training and positive student outcomes. Six studies were included in the present study. These studies found that following an initial presentation of information regarding discrete trail training with in the classroom coaching leads to an increase in teachers’ ability to implement discrete trail training with fidelity. An increase in teacher fidelity was found to correlate positively to an increase in positive student outcomes such as increased student learning and decreased negative student behaviors. The impact these improvements in teacher and student outcomes stand to have on issues such as teacher burnout, attrition, and self-efficacy are also discussed.

Abstract Behavior Skills Training (BST) typically consists of an initial informational component presented to the learners either vocally, through a handout, presentation, or both. Results from the active student responding literature indicates these methods as the least effective means of conveying important information to learners. This study sought to utilize an alternative instructional component, fluency training, and to evaluate if any effects are observed on implementation of the behavior chain of Discrete Trial Training (DTT). Teacher's had previous training and experience on implementing DTT prior to this study--however, all teachers implemented strategies with low integrity. Teachers were trained to fluent levels on verbally stating the component steps of DTT and were then observed during probe sessions to evaluate percentage of steps implemented correctly. The probes indicate an initial improvement, but decreases over time that are consistent with results on other passive in-service trainings. Teachers then took part in a single session of Modeling, Role-Play, and Feedback. Results suggest that while fluency training had an impact on participants' verbal performance on discrete trial information, and affected overt performance during subsequent probes, the effects were small and transient. Performance improved only after training on the components of BST and additional training had been completed in-situ.

Research has found that children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) show significant deficits in receptive language skills (Wiesmer, Lord, & Esler, 2010). One of the primary goals of applied behavior analytic intervention is to improve the communication skills of children with autism by teaching receptive discriminations. Both receptive discriminations and receptive language entail matching spoken words with corresponding objects, symbols (e.g., pictures or words), actions, people, and so on (Green, 2001). In order to develop receptive language skills, children with autism often undergo discrimination training within the context of discrete trial training. This training entails teaching the learner how to respond differentially to different stimuli (Green, 2001). It is through discrimination training that individuals with autism learn and develop language (Lovaas, 2003). The present study compares three procedures for teaching receptive discriminations: (1) simple/conditional (Procedure A), (2) conditional only (Procedure B), and (3) conditional discrimination of two target cards (Procedure C). Six children, ranging in age from 2-years-old to 5-years-old, with an autism diagnosis were taught how to receptively discriminate nine sets of stimuli. Results suggest that the extra training steps included in the simple/conditional and conditional only procedures may not be necessary to teach children with autism how to receptively discriminate. For all participants, Procedure C appeared to be the most efficient and effective procedure for teaching young children with autism receptive discriminations. Response maintenance and generalization probes conducted one-month following the end of training indicate that even though Procedure C resulted in less training sessions overall, no one procedure resulted in better maintenance and generalization than the others. In other words, more training sessions, as evident with the simple/conditional and conditional only procedures, did not facilitate participants’ ability to accurately respond or generalize one-month following training. The present study contributes to the literature on what is the most efficient and effective way to teach receptive discrimination during discrete trial training to children with ASD. These findings are critical as research shows that receptive language skills are predictive of better outcomes and adaptive behaviors in the future.