Comparison of Response Prompting Procedures in Teaching Numeral Identification to Autistic Subjects
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
This investigation compared the effectiveness and efficiency (sessions, trials, percentage of errors, direct instructional time through criterion, and incidental information learned) of constant time delay and system of least prompts in teaching students with autism to name numerals. Two sessions were provided each day; one with constant time delay and one with system of least prompts. Two students learned 16 numerals, and one student did not learn any numerals with these two procedures. The parallel treatments design was used to assess the effects of the two instructional strategies. The results indicate that both procedures were effective in raising responding to criterion levels for two subjects. The constant time-delay procedure was more efficient than the system of least prompts procedure in terms of sessions, trials, percentage of errors, and direct instructional time through criterion. No differences in efficiency were found for the measure of incidental information learned.
Zoom in screen with simultaneous prompting to teach young children with autism.
Olcay S, Karabulut E, Saral D Int J Dev Disabil. 2024; 70(8):1478-1489.
PMID: 39713521 PMC: 11660422. DOI: 10.1080/20473869.2023.2190988.
A Decision-Making Tool for Evaluating and Selecting Prompting Strategies.
Cowan L, Lerman D, Berdeaux K, Prell A, Chen N Behav Anal Pract. 2022; 16(2):459-474.
PMID: 35698480 PMC: 9177132. DOI: 10.1007/s40617-022-00722-8.
Comparison of progressive prompt delay with and without instructive feedback.
Reichow B, Wolery M J Appl Behav Anal. 2011; 44(2):327-40.
PMID: 21709788 PMC: 3120068. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2011.44-327.
Walker G J Autism Dev Disord. 2007; 38(2):261-75.
PMID: 17546491 DOI: 10.1007/s10803-007-0390-4.
Measures in intervention research with young children who have autism.
Wolery M, Garfinkle A J Autism Dev Disord. 2002; 32(5):463-78.
PMID: 12463520 DOI: 10.1023/a:1020598023809.