Comparing skill acquisition under varying onsets of differential reinforcement: A preliminary analysis

The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the effect of implementing differential reinforcement at different times relative to the onset of teaching new skills to learners with autism spectrum disorder. Specifically, we first determined the most efficient differential reinforcement arrangement for each participant. Using the most efficient arrangement, we evaluated if differential reinforcement from the immediate onset, early onset, or late onset is the most efficient for learners to acquire a new skill. Three children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder who have a history of receiving intervention based on the principles of applied behavior analysis participated in this study. The immediate onset of differential reinforcement resulted in the most efficient instruction in 6 of 7 comparisons. The results are discussed in light of previous studies and suggestions for future research are provided.     

The effects of differential negative reinforcement of other behavior and noncontingent escape on compliance

The present study evaluated the effects of noncontingent escape and differential negative reinforcement of other behavior in reducing problem behaviors and increasing compliance in 2 children with disabilities. Results showed that both methods reduced problem behavior and increased compliance for both children.     

Examination of efficacious,efficient, and socially valid error‐correction procedures to teach sight words and prepositions to children with autism spectrum disorder

Prior research shows that learners have idiosyncratic responses to error‐correction procedures during instruction. Thus, assessments that identify error‐correction strategies to include in instruction can aid practitioners in selecting individualized, efficacious, and efficient interventions. The current investigation conducted an assessment to compare 5 error‐correction procedures that have been evaluated in the extant literature and are common in instructional practice for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Results showed that the assessment identified efficacious and efficient error‐correction procedures for all participants, and 1 procedure was efficient for 4 of the 5 participants. To examine the social validity of error‐correction procedures, participants selected among efficacious and efficient interventions in a concurrent‐chains assessment. We discuss the results in relation to prior research on error‐correction procedures and current instructional practices for learners with ASD.     

The Effect of a Multiple‐Schedule Arrangement on Mands of a Child with Autism

Clinical applications of multiple‐schedule arrangements have generally been used to produce discriminated manding. The present study evaluated the effects of a multiple‐schedule arrangement with rules on the rate of mands for one child diagnosed with autism. We sought to bring the participant's mands under discriminative control of adult behavior that closely matched naturally occurring discriminative stimuli in the participant's home environment. The results showed that discriminated manding emerged and responding continued in the presence of a novel therapist. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A comparison of computer‐assisted and therapist‐led instruction for children with autism spectrum disorder

The current investigation applied a model of assessment‐based instruction to an evaluation of the efficacy and efficiency of computer‐assisted and therapist‐led instruction on skill acquisition for 3 participants with autism spectrum disorder. We also evaluated the participant's attending during instruction and the social validity of each format of instruction. The results showed that computer‐assisted instruction was most efficient for 2 of the 3 participants, although attending varied across instructional formats. In addition, the social validity of instructional formats varied across participants.     

An assessment of differential reinforcement procedures for learners with autism spectrum disorder

Differential reinforcement procedures may promote unprompted correct responding, resulting in a quicker transfer of stimulus control than nondifferential reinforcement. Recent studies that have compared reinforcement arrangements have found that the most effective arrangement may differ across participants. The current study conducted an assessment of differential reinforcement arrangements (i.e., quality, schedule, and magnitude) and nondifferential reinforcement to identify the most effective arrangement for each participant. The assessment phase showed that the quality arrangement was the most efficient for all participants during auditory‐visual matching. Next, a validation phase was conducted to evaluate whether the assessment would predict the most effective arrangement across multiple skills. The results from the assessment phase were validated for all participants for the same skill. However, the results were only validated for one participant during the other skills (i.e., tact and intraverbal). The results are discussed in light of previous research and future areas of research.     

An exploratory analysis of task-interspersal procedures while teaching object labels to children with autism

Research has demonstrated that interspersing mastered tasks with new tasks facilitates learning under certain conditions; however, little is known about factors that influence the effectiveness of this treatment strategy. The initial purpose of the current investigation was to evaluate the effects of similar versus dissimilar interspersed tasks while teaching object labels to children diagnosed with autism or developmental delays. We then conducted a series of exploratory analyses involving the type of reinforcer delivered for correct responses on trials with unknown or known object labels. Performance was enhanced under the interspersal condition only when either brief praise was delivered for all correct responses or presumably more preferred reinforcers were provided for performance on known trials rather than on unknown trials.