Effects of Speech and Print Feedback on Spelling by Children With Autism

Abstract

In this systematic replication of a previous study (R. W. Schlosser, D. M. Blischak, P. J. Belfiore, C. Bartley, and N. Barnett, 1998), the effects of speech and print feedback on spelling performance were evaluated. Four children with autism and no functional speech were taught to spell words with a speech-generating device under 3 feedback conditions. In the auditory-visual condition, children received both speech and print feedback, whereas in the auditory and visual conditions, only 1 type of feedback was provided. An adapted alternating treatments design was used. All 4 children reached criterion across conditions. Although 3 children reached criterion first with print or speech-print feedback, 1 child was most efficient with speech-print followed by speech feedback. Based on the findings of both studies, 2 distinct profiles of feedback efficiency are proposed. Children that exemplify the primarily visual profile spell words most efficiently when feedback involves print. Children that fit the auditory profile spell words most efficiently when feedback involves speech. The implications for understanding the learning characteristics of children with autism, as well as those for practice and further research are derived.

Assigning and combining probabilities in single-case studies: A second study

“…For the Schlosser and Blischak (2004) data, the p values assigned to the NAP and the PND were ≤.20, which is well aligned with the authors' claim that the intervention was 2 Note that for the present methodological study, identifying reference values for the MRA required constructing the sampling distributions for each primary indicator and phase length. Nonetheless, if the MRA proves to be a valuable approach, tables with reference values would be made available to applied researchers.…”

“…Using the same logic, there would be 36 ways in which three indicators could be applied to the six data Taylor and Weems (2011) data sets-that is, a total of 729 variations with repetition (or, 2 6 = 64, if only the two nonoverlap procedures are included). For the Schlosser and Blischak (2004) data sets, there would be 312 = 531,441 variations with repetition (212 = 4,096, when only the nonoverlap procedures are included). For each of these variations with repetition, we computed the combined probability and studied the variability in distribution of the combined probability values.…”

“…We chose the autocorrelation estimators r 1 + (Huitema & McKean, 1991), for phases shorter than ten data points (i.e., for all baselines), and the 1-recursive estimator for longer phases, considering bias and mean square error (Solanas, Manolov, & Sierra, 2010). For the Schlosser and Blischak (2004) data and for the participant called Jennifer by Taylor and Weems (2011), it was not possible to estimate the autocorrelation for the baseline, due to the lack of data variability in that phase. Thus, we chose to sample both phases' data from a population with the same autocorrelation that had been estimated from the Phase B data.…”

“…Two studies (Schlosser & Blischak, 2004;Taylor & Weems, 2011) 1 using multiple-baseline designs (MBDs) across participants were included here. MBDs across participants have three characteristics that make them suitable for quantitative integration: Several data series are available, these series are independent (Jones & Fiske, 1953), and the same intervention and goals are present for each of them (Rosnow & Rosenthal, 2009).…”

Computer-Assisted Interventions for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders within School-Based Contexts: A Quantitative Meta-Analysis of Single-Subject Research

“…Specifically, seven of the studies targeted social behaviors (Bernard-Opitz et al 2001;Cheng and Ye 2010;Hetzroni and Tannous 2004;Murdock et al 2013;Sansosti and Powell-Smith 2008;Simpson et al 2004;Whalen et al 2006), nine studies targeted behavioral skills (Ayres et al 2009;Bereznak et al 2012;Cihak et al 2010;Flores et al 2012;Hagiwara and Smith-Myles 1999;Mancil et al 2009;Mechling et al 2006Mechling et al , 2009Soares et al 2009), and 12 studies targeted academic skills (Bosseler and Massaro 2003;Coleman-Martin et al 2005;Ganz et al 2014;Hetzroni and Shalem 2005;Pennington 2010;Schlosser and Blischak 2004;Simpson and Keen 2010;Smith 2013;Smith-Myles et al 2007;Soares et al 2009;Yaw et al 2011). The computer-assisted interventions implemented within the studies ranged in length from 3 to 30 sessions.…”