The influence of instructive feedback presentation schedule: A replication with children with autism spectrum disorder

Abstract

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.

Evaluating discrete trial teaching with instructive feedback delivered in a dyad arrangement via telehealth

“…This level of attending and engagement may be important for clients to learn through direct telehealth intervention and may explain the acquisition of the observational responses and those related to the instructional feedback. Nottingham et al (2020) discussed the potential role of a bidirectional naming repertoire in the acquisition of secondary target responses without direct teaching. A bidirectional naming repertoire is a higher‐order operant in which there is a two‐way relationship between speaker and listener behaviors in which teaching one of the behaviors is enough to establish both repertoires without direct training (Horne & Lowe, 1996; Miguel, 2016).…”

“…Discrete trial teaching (DTT) is a commonly implemented ABA procedure used to teach a variety of skills to individuals with ASD (Eikeseth et al, 2014;Leaf et al, 2016). Additionally, an increasing number of studies (e.g., Leaf et al, 2017;Nottingham et al, 2020) have demonstrated the benefits of incorporating instructive feedback into DTT. Instructive feedback is the practice of including extra nontarget (or secondary targets) stimuli in the instruction or consequence component of DTT (Werts et al, 2003).…”

The Use of Instructive Feedback to Promote Emergent Tact and Intraverbal Control: A Replication

“…One potential reason for slow or lack of acquisition is the use of tangible preferred items rather than tokens or edibles, which were used in most studies on IF (e.g., Frampton & Shillingsburg, 2020 ; Loughrey et al, 2014 ; Nottingham et al, 2017 ; Nottingham et al, 2020 ; Vladescu & Kodak, 2013 ). We deviated from the procedures in Frampton and Shillingsburg ( 2020 ) to provide tangible items rather than tokens because the participants did not use token economies in their programming at the time of this study.…”

“…The inclusion of secondary targets may result in more rapid learning because learners can acquire twice (or more; Nottingham et al, 2017 ) the number of targets when IF is included (Shillingsburg et al, 2018 ). Acquisition of secondary targets with IF has been demonstrated in 1:1 and small-group instruction for several populations, including individuals of typical development and individuals with disabilities like intellectual disability, ASD, speech and language impairments, learning disabilities, developmental delays, and Down syndrome (e.g., Carroll & Kodak, 2015 ; Leaf et al, 2017 ; Nottingham et al, 2017 ; Nottingham et al, 2020 ; Tekin-Iftar, 2003 ; Tullis et al, 2022 ; Werts et al, 1995 ). Secondary target acquisition with IF has also been demonstrated with several procedural variations such as the number, location, and presentation schedule (Carroll & Kodak, 2015 ; Nottingham et al, 2017 ; Nottingham et al, 2020 ; Vladescu & Kodak, 2013 ).…”

Emergent Tact Control Following Stimulus Pairing: Comparison of Procedural Variations

“…Tact emergence following stimulus pairing has also been documented in older children of typical development (e.g., Pérez-González et al, 2014;Rosales, Rehfeldt, & Huffman, 2012) and in children with language delays due to neurodevelopmental disorders (e.g., Byrne, Rehfeldt, & Aguirre, 2014;Solares & Fryling, 2018). In addition, tact emergence following stimulus pairing is a common finding in studies on the use of instructive feedback procedures, in which some acquisition targets are presented via modeling alone and often include novel tacts (see, e.g., Haq, Zemantic, Kodak, LeBlanc, & Ruppert, 2017;Nottingham, Vladescu, DeBar, Deshais, & DeQuinzio, 2020;Reichow & Wolery, 2011;Vladescu & Kodak, 2013).…”