Using Video Modeling and Reinforcement to Teach Perspective‐taking Skills to Children With Autism

Abstract

We evaluated video modeling and reinforcement for teaching perspective-taking skills to 3 children with autism using a multiple baseline design. Video modeling and reinforcement were effective; however, only 2 children were able to pass an untrained task, indicating limited generalization. The findings suggest that video modeling may be an effective technology for teaching perspective taking if researchers can continue to develop strategies for enhancing the generalization of these new skills.

Assessing Relational Learning Deficits in Perspective-Taking in Children With High-Functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder

“…Baron-Cohen et al (1985) found that children with autism showed considerable difficulties with the task, whereas typically developing children and children with Down syndrome could easily answer the experimenter's questions about the Sally doll's perspective (the reader is also referred to Baren-Cohen, 1989). LeBlanc, Coates, Daneshvar, Charlop-Christy, Morris, & Lancaster (2003) similarly found that children with autism were strikingly deficient in their performance on a version of the Sally Anne task. The children weire only able to pass the task after intensive behavioral intervention involving video modeling and positive reinforcement, and even then, the children's generalization of perspective-taking skills to new situations was limited.…”

Theory of Mind: An Overview and Behavioral Perspective

“…(BaronCohen, 2001, p. 174) What makes such definitions problematic for behavior analysts is that ToM researchers almost never identify what children actually do and the circumstances under which they do it, a tack not likely to pique the interest of theorists interested in "tapping children's conception of mind" or understanding "that the mind is a representational system, which does not simply reflect reality" (Hale & Tager-Flusberg, 2003, p. 346). Unfortunately, however, only a handful of behavior analysts have addressed the topic of ToM (e.g., Layng, 2005;LeBlanc et al, 2003;McHugh, Barnes-Holmes, & BarnesHolmes, 2006;McHugh, Barnes-Holmes, Barnes-Holmes, & Stewart, 2004;Okuda & Inoue, 2000;Salzinger, 2006;Schlinger, 2006Schlinger, , 2007Spradlin & Brady, 2008). Because even fewer behavior analysts have experimentally investigated behaviors related to ToM, we are forced to mine the standard developmental literature for studies that support a general behavior-analytic account of ToM.…”

“…For example, using a multiple-baseline design across tasks, LeBlanc et al (2003) taught perspective taking to three children with autism using video modeling and reinforcement. The researchers presented two tasks to the children, a false or unexpected-identity task and a hide-andseek task.…”

“…The problem of generalization in both the Knoll and Charman (2000) and the LeBlanc et al (2003) study (for one participant) raises the question of the role of stimulus control and generalization in ToM tasks in experimental settings. Spradlin and Brady (2008) have suggested that the similarities and differences between the home setting of a child and the setting in which a false belief test is administered will determine success on such tests.…”

“…Although the LeBlanc et al (2003) study described above indicates that perspective taking, at least as defined in terms of the tasks measured, can be taught to children with autism, it sheds very little light on the learning experiences that result in perspective taking or a ToM in typical children. Ironically, Skinner (1945Skinner ( , 1953Skinner ( , 1957 may have provided the beginnings of an answer by describing how the verbal community teaches individuals to respond verbally to (i.e., label or describe) their own private events.…”