Toward a Behavior Analysis of Complex Language for Children with Autism: Evaluating the Relationship between PEAK and the VB-MAPP

Promoting the emergence of advanced knowledge: A review of peak relational training system: Direct training module by Mark R. Dixon

“…The interobserver reliability of the PEAK‐DTM has ranged from 85% to 90% when scores between practitioners and a highly skilled behavior analyst (Dixon, Carman, et al, ) and between two trained implementers (Dixon, Whiting, Rowsey, & Belisle, ; Rowsey et al, ) are compared. In studies of convergent validity, Dixon, Carman, et al () and Dixon et al () showed that the PEAK‐DTM correlated significantly with the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (Dunn & Dunn, ), the Illinois Early Learning Standards Test (Illinois State Board of Education, ), and the VB‐MAPP (Sundberg, ). Additional research by Dixon, Whiting, et al () indicated a strong, significant correlation between scores on the PEAK‐DTM and scores on standardized intelligence tests among 50 students with autism and other developmental disabilities.…”

Student outcomes after 1 year of front line staff implementation of the PEAK curriculum

“…The PEAK‐DT assessment (PDA) is composed of 184 skills, ranging from prerequisite learning skills (e.g., eye contact and simple requests) to more complex language skills (e.g., simple mathematics and audience control; Rowsey, Belisle, & Dixon, ). The skills assessed are suitable up to the language skills expected of a typically developing 8‐year‐old (Dixon, Belisle, Whiting, & Rowsey, ), and participant scores on the PDA have been correlated with IQ (Dixon, Whiting, Rowsey, & Belisle, ), picture vocabulary (Dixon, Carman, et al, ), and scores on the Verbal Behavior Milestones Assessment and Placement Program (Sundberg, ; Dixon, Belisle, Stanley, et al, ). PDA scores range from 0 to 184 and indicate the total number of mastered skills.…”

The effectiveness of the peak relational training system and corresponding changes on the VB‐MAPP for young adults with autism

“…Through PEAK‐DT, learners progress through increasingly complex verbal operant skills guided by the PEAK‐DTA. Prior research has supported the effectiveness of the procedures described in PEAK‐DT in teaching target skills in single‐case evaluations (Dixon, Belisle, Munoz, Stanley, & Rowsey, ; McKeel, Rowsey, Belisle, et al, ) as well as in a randomized controlled evaluation (McKeel, Dixon, et al, ). Results reported by McKeel, Rowsey, Belisle, et al () showed that the procedures described in PEAK‐DT were efficacious in teaching two children with autism to correctly demonstrate basic autoclitics, receptive metonymical tacting, and expressive identification of planet names, and one child with autism receptive metonymical tacting, expressive metonymical tacting, and guessing.…”

“…In single‐case evaluations, successful outcomes are demonstrated when participants demonstrate mastery of the target skill or several target skills. In between‐group evaluations, successful outcomes are demonstrated when participants master several target skills relative to a control group or condition (e.g., McKeel, Dixon, et al, ). Both single‐case and between‐group evaluations have limitations.…”

“…Unlike the PEAK‐DTA, the VB‐MAPP does not specify socially relevant topographies of verbal responding, rather provides a metric of the overall number of responses that a learner can emit. Prior research in which the PEAK‐DTA and VB‐MAPP were conducted with both children and adults with autism has suggested that there is a strong, significant correlation between participant scores on the PEAK‐DTA and scores on the VB‐MAPP (Dixon et al, ). Because of the conceptual similarities between these two assessments and their strong relationship, improvements in participant scores on the VB‐MAPP as an ancillary measure to improvements on the PEAK‐DTA following PEAK‐DT instruction may provide greater confidence in the use of PEAK‐DT as a CTM with this population.…”