An Evaluation of Positional Prompts for Teaching Receptive Identification to Individuals Diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Abstract

In this study, we evaluated the effects of positional prompts on teaching receptive identification to six children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The researchers implemented a most-to-least prompting system using a three level hierarchy to teach receptive picture identification. Within the prompting hierarchy, only positional prompts were used. The most assistive prompt was placing the target stimulus 12 in. closer to the participant, the less assistive prompt was placing the target stimulus 6 in. closer to the participant, and no prompt was placing the target stimulus in line with the alternative stimuli. A non-concurrent multiple baseline design across behaviors was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the positional prompt. Results indicated that the implementation of positional prompts resulted in participants reaching mastery criterion and maintaining skills at follow-up for the majority of the participants. The results of the study have both future clinical and research implications.

A randomized clinical trial of three prompting systems to teach tact relations

“…Although the three prompting systems were equally effective, it may be the case that the maintenance of skills taught with one system is better than the others and/or the participants and/or interventionists preferred one prompting method over the others. Finally, and similar to other studies utilizing clinical judgment (e.g., Cihon et al, 2019;Cihon et al, 2018;J. B.…”

“…B. Leaf, Cihon, Townley‐Cochran et al, ), we did not include measures of treatment fidelity with FPF with respect to the interventionists' choice as to whether to prompt, when to prompt, and how to prompt. Future studies could address this limitation by evaluating agreement with an independent observer.…”

“…B. Leaf, Cihon, Townley-Cochran, et al, 2016b). SSEDs have also been used to compare two or more prompt-fading methods to each other (e.g., Libby et al, 2008).…”

Creating and Sharing Digital ABA Instructional Activities: A Practical Tutorial

“…Prompting and error correction When completing instructional activities, clients are likely to make errors. Therefore, BCBAs need to consider the types of error correction procedures that will be most appropriate for their clients (Leaf et al, 2016). Common components of an error correction procedure include (a) demonstration of the correct response, (b) an active client response (requiring a student response after the prompt), (c) repeated representation of the instruction, and (d) differential reinforcement of the correct response (Cariveau, La Cruz Montilla, Ball, & Gonzalez, 2019).…”

Evaluating Three Methods of Stimulus Rotation when Teaching Receptive Labels

“…Although researchers have found DTT to be an effective approach for teaching receptive labels for individuals with ASD, there are many variables that may alter the efficacy of DTT of receptive labels which warrant future research. Some of these variables include prompting and prompt fading procedures (Heckaman, Alber, Hooper, & Heward, 1998;Leaf et al, 2016b), introduction of new targets (e.g., Grow, Carr, Kodak, Jostad, & Kisamore, 2011;Gutierrez et al, 2009), instructional format (e.g., Taubman et al, 2001), topography of instructions and feedback (e.g., Leaf et al, 2017), staff training (e.g., following strict protocol or the use of clinical judgment; e.g., Grow & LeBlanc, 2013;Leaf et al, 2016a, and rotation of stimuli while teaching receptive labels as it pertains to the position of each of the stimuli on the table.…”