Recently, researchers have investigated the effectiveness and efficiency of presenting secondary targets during learning trials for individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This instructional method may be more efficient than typical methods used with learners with ASD, because learners may acquire secondary targets without additional instruction. This review will discuss the recent literature on providing secondary targets during teaching trials for individuals with ASD, identify common aspects and results among these studies, and identify areas for future research.

The current study examined the outcome of presenting multiple secondary targets in learning trials for individuals with autism spectrum disorder. We compared conditions in which (a) a secondary target was presented in the antecedent and consequence of trials, (b) two secondary targets were presented in the consequence of trials, (c) one secondary target was presented in the consequence of each trial, and (d) no additional targets were presented trials. The participants acquired the majority of secondary targets. Presenting one or multiple secondary targets per trial, regardless of the location of these secondary targets, increased the efficiency of instruction in comparison to a condition with no secondary target.

Generalization is a critical outcome for individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) who display new skills in a limited range of contexts. In the absence of proper planning, generalization may not be observed. The purpose of the current study was to directly compare serial to concurrent multiple exemplar training using total training time per exemplar, mean total training time, and exposures to mastery across three children diagnosed with ASD. Additionally, we assessed the efficiency of presenting secondary targets in the antecedent and consequence portions of learning trials and evaluated generalization to tacts not associated with direct teaching. Results suggested that all training conditions produced acquisition and generalization for trained and untrained exemplars. However, the serial multiple exemplar training condition was more efficient for two participants, whereas the instructive feedback condition was the most efficient for the third. Findings are discussed considering previous studies and areas for future research.

Alpine Learning Group Instructive feedback (IF) is a modification to discrete trial instruction that may increase instructional efficiency for individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Several variations of IF have recently been evaluated in the literature; however, few studies have assessed the effectiveness and efficiency of presenting secondary targets on continuous versus intermittent presentation schedules. The current study evaluated the effectiveness and efficiency of various presentation schedules of secondary targets during discrete trial instruction. Specifically, we replicated and extended Griffen et al. (1998) by comparing a condition in which secondary targets were presented during each trial of a session, a condition in which secondary targets were presented every other trial, and a condition in which secondary targets were presented about every 4 trials. Within-subject replications were included for both participants. One of the intermittent presentation schedules was associated with the most optimal outcomes in all 4 comparisons.

No abstract