Teaching children with autism spectrum disorder to tact auditory stimuli

Hanney, Nicole M.; Carr, James E.; LeBlanc, Linda

doi:10.1002/jaba.605

Cited by 15 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…et al, preference for social and non-social stimulus was assessed using portable tablet computers [32]. Hanney NM et al, claims that in teaching methodology compound (auditory stimulus presented with visual cues) stimulus presentation was more effective than isolated (auditory stimulus presented without visual cues) [33]. The robot-child interaction allows the children with ASD to improve communication skills as the environment is highly predictable rather than a complex traditional one [34].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the Effectiveness of Different Reinforcement Stimuli in a Robotic Therapy for Children With ASD

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research has shown reliability in robotic therapies for improvement in core impairments of autism. To improve the efficiency of communication using robots, this study evaluates the effectiveness of three different stimuli in a robotic intervention for children with autism spectrum disorder. Three different reinforcement stimuli presented in least-to-most (LTM) order introduced in this therapy using NAO robot are: visual (color variation), auditory and motion cues. The therapy was tested on 12 ASD children, 4 out of 12 children fall under mild category whereas 8 fall under the minimal category of autism. The experimentation was conducted for 2 months. Total 8 experiments were conducted with 1 trial per week. Total 12 cues were given per trial, 4 cues corresponding to each category. In total 96 cues were given per subject, 32 cues from each category. The results indicate a general trend for linking a particular autism category with the most effective stimulus for that category. It can be concluded that visual cue (color variation) is the most effective reinforcement stimulus for children with minimal autism as 8 out of 8 i.e., 100% were more responsive to visual cues whereas for children with mild autism category, 3 out of 4 i.e., 75% are more receptive towards the motion stimulus. The parameters used for assessment were joint attention and the time eye contact is maintained. Single factor ANOVA was used for the statistical analysis of results with alpha is 0.05 and p-value 0.0342, F value is 3.7456 and F critical value is 3.2834. The test was performed on 96 (8x12) trails in total, therefore ensuring the significance and reliability of our results. INDEX TERMS Autism spectrum disorder (ASD), reinforcement stimulus, robotic therapy, joint attention.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the Effectiveness of Different Reinforcement Stimuli in a Robotic Therapy for Children With ASD

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As such, we calculated effect sizes for 25 single-case and two group design studies. For studies that conducted a comparison (e.g., Hanney et al., 2019; sound-only condition compared to an object-with-sound-compound condition), we calculated the effect sizes for all conditions and reported them separately. Table 3 shows whether a study included in this review has either met, met with reservations, or has not met quality standards for research; their effects sizes; and the total number of AB comparisons within each study for single-case design studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The current review yielded a few studies that specifically asked research questions about the effects of individual components. One example is Hanney et al. (2019) who compared auditory stimuli presented without visual cues (e.g., dog barking) with compound stimuli that included auditory and visual cues (e.g., a toy dog that emits barking noises) and found that compound stimuli has a higher effect size (i.e., Tau-U = 0.71) than using just the auditory stimuli (Tau-U = 0.48).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Settings. Of the 51 studies included in the review, 43.14% (n ¼ 22) conducted their intervention in the participant's school such as the classroom (e.g., Valentino & Shillingsburg, 2011) or a separate quiet room (Schnell et al, 2018); 37.25% (n ¼ 19) conducted their intervention in the participant's ASD treatment center (e.g., Majdalany et al, 2014), clinic (e.g., Hanney et al, 2019), or a research laboratory (e.g., Naoi et al, 2007); and 17.65% (n ¼ 9) conducted their intervention in the participant's homes (e.g., Carbone et al, 2006). Setting descriptions from four studies were not sufficient to identify the exact location (e.g., Scattone & Billhofer, 2008) and three studies were conducted in multiple locations such as Majdalany et al's (2016) where they conducted their intervention in either a participant's home or a therapy room.…”

Section: Settings and Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tact instruction for children with autism spectrum disorder: A review

Bak

Dueñas

Avendano

et al. 2021

Autism & Developmental Language Impairments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tacts facilitate social interaction, and a strong tact repertoire can lead to the development of other verbal operants. For children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), the development of a tact repertoire can reduce stereotypical and repetitive language and increase social communication, as functional language may reduce the amount of stereotypical vocal behavior that children engage in. However, teaching tact repertoires to children with ASD that maintain and generalize is difficult. The current study reviewed tact interventions for children with ASD from 2000 to 2019 to provide an overview of current tact interventions, their effectiveness, and the inclusion of intervention components that may promote maintenance and generalization of learned tacts in children with ASD. Fifty-one studies were included in the review. Of the studies that met criteria for effect size calculations 87.18% of the interventions showed excellent or high effect. Although many of the studies focused more on stimulus control to answer specific research questions, some studies implemented intervention components and procedures that could promote acquisition and generalization of learned tacts in children with ASD. We discuss implications and the need to increase research regarding tact intervention components that can increase generalization in children with ASD.

show abstract

“…Similar to Sivaraman et al (2020), some idiosyncratic modifications were necessary for participants based on observed patterns of behavior, participant-specific repertoires, or face coverings. Making modifications based on observed patterns of behavior and functional relations is common in the behavior-analytic literature (e.g., Bergmann et al, 2020;Hanney et al, 2019;Kisamore et al, 2016;Shillingsburg et al, 2014;Tiger et al, 2009;Williams et al, 2003). Although minor modifications were necessary for specific participants in the present study (e.g., change in mask type to include a nose clip, modified definition of tolerance), the primary components of the treatment package (i.e., graduated exposure, prompts, and differential reinforcement) remained constant across participants.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tolerance of face coverings for children with autism spectrum disorder

Halbur

Kodak

McKee

et al. 2021

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Healthcare professionals and government officials have advised the use of personal protective equipment, such as face masks and face shields, to assist with limiting the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). Due to the prevalence of challenging behavior associated with other medical routines, the present study evaluated a treatment package composed of graduated exposure, prompts, reinforcement, and escape extinction on tolerance of wearing a face covering for up to 5 min for 12 children with ASD in a systematic replication of Cox et al. (2017) and Sivaraman et al. (2020). We also extended previous research by measuring generalization of face covering type (i.e., face shield) and the efficacy of a treatment extension for tolerating a face covering for up to 15 min during the participants' trial-based instruction and play periods.

show abstract

Teaching children with autism spectrum disorder to tact auditory stimuli

Cited by 15 publications

References 6 publications

Comparing the Effectiveness of Different Reinforcement Stimuli in a Robotic Therapy for Children With ASD

Comparing the Effectiveness of Different Reinforcement Stimuli in a Robotic Therapy for Children With ASD

Tact instruction for children with autism spectrum disorder: A review

Tolerance of face coverings for children with autism spectrum disorder

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About