Comparison studies conducted to determine which instructional interventions are most efficient for teaching discrete behaviors to individuals with disabilities are potentially valuable, although some threats to internal validity may be more likely in these studies. Studies included in this review typically met common internal validity standards, such as reliability measurement, but often did not include controls specific to comparison designs. Comparisons often included young children with autism and were frequently conducted by researchers in self-contained classroom settings. Systematic instruction was effective in nearly all comparisons, although many included undifferentiated data (i.e., both interventions were equally effective), and within-participant replications were often inconsistent (i.e., outcomes varied across comparisons for a single participant). Results suggest implementers should conduct high-fidelity instruction with corrective and instructive feedback and should choose intervention variations based on participant preference. We recommend researchers include control sets or time-lagged introductions, counterbalance behavior sets, and measure differential acquisition over time.

Limited data are available regarding how response prompting procedures should be used in early childhood settings. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficiency of progressive time delay instruction presented via two trial arrangements: massed and embedded. During massed trial sessions, a short instructional session was conducted, followed by game play. During embedded trial sessions, trials were conducted during game play. Across 12 participants with and without disabilities, efficiency and preference data were mixed. Preference data suggested most participants preferred the instruction type that resulted in most efficient learning. Social validity data suggest inservice and preservice practitioners may be equally likely to use the procedures, but some respondents indicated they might be less willing to use embedded trial arrangements due to increased effort in materials preparation. Implications include the possibility that faster learners may learn better in embedded contexts and that children may prefer instructional contexts that are most efficient for them. Keywords instruction, massed, embedded, time delay, adapted alternating treatments design Research Question 1: Does instruction using massed trial arrangements versus trials embedded in game play result in differential efficiency of acquisition? Research Question 2: Do children prefer either arrangement? Research Question 3: What is the relationship between acquisition and preference? Research Question 4: Do practitioners report differential likelihood of use for instruction using massed trial arrangements versus trials embedded into game play?

For children with complex communication needs (CCN), augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) devices offer a means to communicate and participate in daily activities. Effective implementation and intervention practices are needed for supporting teaching teams working with children with CCN to improve child use of AAC. The purpose of this article is to describe two studies examining these issues. Study 1 examined the effects of a behavior skills training (BST) approach to professional development to support a classroom teaching team in the implementation of a behavior support plan for a child with CCN; Study 2 evaluated the effects of a single behavior (adult modeling) on AAC use. Results indicated teachers increased their fidelity with training and coaching, but not with training alone. Further, unprompted use of the AAC device occurred more frequently when an adult modeled use of the device.

An antecedent exercise (AE) intervention was conducted with two young children who demonstrated challenging behaviors during a large group circle time activity in a preschool classroom; outcomes were evaluated in the context of alternating treatments designs. Results from the initial visual analysis suggested no overlap between conditions, with small, consistent effects favoring the AE condition. However, plotting reliability data suggested observer bias was present for one participant. Subsequently (post hoc), a blind observer coded data from all conditions for that participant. Results suggested that no functional relation was present for that participant. Implications include the need for blind data collectors and additional, highly rigorous studies assessing the effectiveness of AE.

No abstract

Interruption and redirection (IR) procedures involve systematically disrupting an undesirable behavior and prompting an individual to engage in an alternative behavior (e.g., Ahearn et al., 2007). These procedures have been frequently assessed for reducing stereotypy for autistic individuals. The purposes of this review were to determine (a) for whom and under what conditions physical and verbal IR procedures are assessed; (b) what outcomes are measured; (c) whether results vary by intervention characteristics, dependent variable types, design quality, and publication status; and (d) the extent to which generalization and maintenance outcomes are measured and show positive effects. IR interventions were moderately successful for reducing stereotypy but were less effective for improving appropriate vocalizations and functional engagement. Generalization and maintenance outcomes, when measured, were poor. Results indicate the need for alternative or augmentative procedures that focus on engagement in meaningful interactions and activities.

Appropriate use of function-based assessments and interventions is crucial for improving educational outcomes and ensuring the well-being of children who engage in dangerous problem behaviors such as pica. A function-based assessment was conducted for a child engaging in pica in an inclusive childcare setting. Results suggest pica was maintained by access to adult attention. Function-based interventions were developed, assessed, and shared with the child's teaching team. Follow-up data suggest that his teachers continued to use the intervention and that levels of pica remained low.

Purpose Augmented input is the act of concurrently modeling language verbally and on a communication device, and is one strategy for teaching individuals to effectively use aided modes of communication. The purpose of this literature review is to assess the efficacy of augmented input for increasing communication and to identify intervention components, participant characteristics, and instructional contexts related to therapeutic outcomes. Method We double screened all potential sources and double coded all included sources. Database, forward, and backward searches yielded 99 single case designs in 26 sources. We coded characteristics of participants, instructional contexts, independent variables, and dependent variables. We also coded quality/rigor and primary outcomes for each design or comparison. Results Across high-quality studies, two thirds of designs indicated that augmented input was effective compared to baseline conditions and alternative interventions, and exploratory analyses indicated that receptive language skills, age, and diagnoses may moderate intervention efficacy. Most augmented input interventions included additional components that may serve as “active ingredients” (e.g., systematic prompting, contextual reinforcement). Most studies also did not report participant characteristics hypothesized to moderate intervention efficacy (e.g., joint attention skills, imitation repertoire). Results also indicated high risk of publication bias, with peer-reviewed sources twice as likely to include positive effects than dissertations and theses. Conclusions Across high-quality studies, augmented input was inconsistently effective as a stand-alone intervention. Packaged interventions that included augmented input were typically more effective than augmented input in isolation, particularly for individuals who were young, had strong receptive language skills, or had no comorbid diagnoses.