A comparison of two methods of prompting in training discrimination of communication book pictures by autistic students

Two methods of prompting were compared for their relative effectiveness in teaching a group of autistic students to discriminate line drawings used in picture communication books. All four students required fewer trials to meet the task criterion using a delayed-prompting technique. Further, students made significantly more errors in the fading-of-prompts design than in the delayed-prompting design. The high rate of errors in faded-prompt sessions resulted in some students displaying aberrant behaviors. The results are discussed in terms of effectiveness of the two teaching methodologies, as well as the consequences of error patterns. Suggestions are made for further research.

[1]  C. Scheibel,et al.  SYMBOL COMMUNICATION FOR THE MENTALLY HANDICAPPED. , 1975, Mental retardation.

[2]  S. Striefel,et al.  Acquisition and cross modal generalization of receptive and expressive signing skills in a retarded deaf girl. , 2008, Journal of mental deficiency research.

[3]  S. Osler,et al.  The biosocial basis of mental retardation , 1965 .

[4]  C. M. Johnson.  ERRORLESS LEARNING IN A MULTIHANDICAPPED ADOLESCENT1 , 1977 .

[5]  D. Reid,et al.  Teaching nonvocal communication skills to multihandicapped retarded adults. , 1977, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[6]  F. Billingsley,et al.  Response Prompting and the Transfer of Stimulus Control: Methods, Research, and a Conceptual Framework , 1983 .

[7]  D M Baer,et al.  Teaching productive noun suffixes to severely retarded children. , 1973, American journal of mental deficiency.

[8]  P. Touchette.  The effects of graduated stimulus change on the acquisition of a simple discrimination in severely retarded boys. , 1968, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[9]  C. Musselwhite,et al.  Communication Programming for the Severely Handicapped: Vocal and Non-Vocal Strategies , 1981 .

[10]  M. Wolery,et al.  A comparison of time delay and system of least prompts in teaching object identification. , 1987, Research in developmental disabilities.

[11]  Murray Sidman,et al.  Programming Perception and Learning for Retarded Children , 1966 .

[12]  C. Kiernan.  The use of nonvocal communication techniques with autistic individuals. , 1983, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[13]  J. Halle,et al.  Time delay: a technique to increase language use and facilitate generalization in retarded children. , 1979, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[14]  P. Touchette,et al.  Errorless learning: reinforcement contingencies and stimulus control transfer in delayed prompting. , 1984, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[15]  Marg Csapo,et al.  Comparison of Two Prompting Procedures to Increase Response Fluency among Severely Handicapped Learners , 1981 .

[16]  D. Browder.  Using Time Delay to Teach Manual Signs to a Severely Retarded Student. , 1981 .

[17]  R. Gaylord-Ross,et al.  Task difficulty and aberrant behavior in severely handicapped students. , 1981, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[18]  D. Gast,et al.  Applying Time Delay Procedure to the Instruction of the Severely Handicapped , 1981 .

[19]  E. Carr,et al.  Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. , 1985, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[20]  D. Gast,et al.  Teaching a Multihandicapped Adult Manual Signs Using a Constant Time Delay Procedure , 1981 .

[21]  Sarah W. Blackstone,et al.  Augmentative communication : an introduction , 1986 .

[22]  Leija V. McReynolds,et al.  Single-subject experimental designs in communicative disorders , 1983 .

[23]  E. Konarski,et al.  The "good behavior game": a systematic replication in two unruly transitional classrooms , 1978 .

[24]  G. Karlan,et al.  Establishing generalized verb-noun instruction-following skills in retarded children. , 1976, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[25]  D. L. Bennett.  Time Delay and System of Least Prompts: A Comparison in Teaching Manual Sign Production. , 1986 .

[26]  K. Dyer,et al.  The role of response delay in improving in the discrimination performance or autistic children. , 1982, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[27]  H. Shane,et al.  Election criteria for the adoption of an augmentative communication system: preliminary considerations. , 1980, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[28]  L. Lloyd,et al.  A survey of the use of non-speech systems with the severely communication impaired. , 1978, Mental retardation.