Parent-Clinicians in the Language Training of an Autistic Child

Abstract

The parents of a 10-year-old autistic boy were trained in using modeling-reinforcement procedures to improve the language skills of their child. They conducted therapy for 125 45-minute sessions and were supervised after every five sessions. Initially the child used about 100 words, but most of them were intelligible only to his parents. After training, he was able to articulate 83 words acceptably; in addition, he could label pictures of objects and use short phrases. Definite improvements were also noted in his initiative and ability in communicating outside the home. However, his speech does not begin to approximate that of a normal 10-year-old.

Teaching language to nonverbal children-with emphasis on problems of generalization.

“…Many case studies have reported attempts to teach functional language to nonverbal subjects. Some of these involved children who were initially mute (e.g., Brawley, Harris, Allen, Fleming, & Peterson, 1969;Colligan & Bellamy, 1968;Hewett, 1965;Stark et al, 1968), while others had limited or echolalic speech (e.g., Goldstein & Lanyon, 1971;Jensen & Womack, 1967;Matheny, 1968;McClure, 1968;Ney, 1967;Ney, Palvesky, & Markely, 1971;Shaw, 1969;Sulzbacher & Costello, 1970;Tramontana & Shivers, 1971;Tramontana & Stimbert, 1970;Weiss & Born, 1967;Wetzel, Baker, Roney, & Martin, 1966;Wolf, Risky, & Mees, 1964). Although all researchers reported some success in establishing functional speech, the degree of experimental control was highly variable; consequently, it is difficult to identify the active treatment ingredients.…”

“…It appears that this is the critical direction our attention must now take. The training of parents as therapists is doubtless especially important in this respect (e.g., Goldstein & Lanyon, 1971;Hewett, 1965;Kozloff, 1973). Lovaas et al (1973), in their follow-up study, made it clear that we must facilitate the transfer of the child's skills to the natural environment and ensure that there is sufficient reinforcement to sustain these behaviors beyond the therapy room.…”

“…VERBAL IMITATION Most researchers adopt some variation of the four steps established by Lovaas et al (1966) Since the initial research of the mid-1960s (Hewett, 1965;Lovaas et al, 1966;Salzinger, Feldman, Cowan, & Salzinger, 1965;Wolf, Risley, & Mees, 1964; Risley & Wolf, Note 1), there have been a variety of case reports describing operant procedures for teaching speech to mute or echolalic children (e.g., Blake & Moss, 1967;Chapel, 1970;Colligan & Bellamy, 1968;Cook & Adams, 1966;Goldstein & Lanyon, 1971;Guess, Rutherford, & Twichell, 1969;Kerr et al, 1965;Marshall & Hegrenes, 1970Picaizen, Berger, Baronofsky, Nichols, & Karen, 1969;Risley & Wolf, 1967;Schell, Stark, & Giddan, 1967;Sloane et al, 1968;Stark et al, 1968;Sulzbacher & Costello, 1970). These procedures have been applied in group as well as individual settings (e.g., Borus et al, 1973;Koegel & Rincover, 1974).…”

Differential Reinforcement of Correct Responses to Probes and Prompts in Picture‐name Training With Severely Retarded Children

“…On prompt trials, the child is reinforced for imitating the prompt; on probe trials, he or she is reinforced for naming the picture. Typically, the frequency of reinforcement is the same for correct responses on both prompt and probe trials (Biberdorf & Pear, 77 1980, 133, 77-89 NUMBER 1 (SPRING 1980) 1977Bricker, 1972;Buddenhagen, 1971;Goldstein & Lanyon, 1971;Hartung, 1970;Hewett, 1965;Hingten & Churchill, 1970;Kircher, Pear, & Martin, 1971;Stephens, Pear, Wray, & Jackson, 1975;Wolf, Risley, & Mees, 1964).…”