Use of Video Modeling to Teach Developmentally Appropriate Play With Korean American Children With Autism

Abstract

Given the increased number of students with disabilities who have culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds in the United States, there has been growing attention to the cultural responsiveness of evidence-based behavioral interventions. The current study examined the effects of video modeling intervention on social play and interactions of three Korean American children with autism. Developmentally and linguistically appropriate social and play levels were identified for each child prior to the intervention and applied to set individualized intervention goals. The children watched video clips of their mothers and the researcher engaging in appropriate social play prior to play sessions with their mothers. The results indicate that scripted verbalizations and play actions increased among all children with autism and were maintained at high levels when measured 2 weeks post intervention. Generalization across novel players and toy sets was also observed at relatively lower, but still increased levels. The procedures and results can assist practitioners and researchers in better understanding how to consider designing and implementing culturally responsive behavioral interventions for culturally and linguistically diverse children with autism and their families.

Using video modeling to improve the social communication of an adolescent with autism spectrum disorder

“…Of the twenty studies, only two clearly used video modeling as the sole intervention in all phases of the study (Kim, 2016;Sherer et al, 2001). While both studies reported strong results in some aspects (scripted verbalizations and play actions for Kim, three of the five participants for Sherer et.…”

“…The eleven studies that met the criteria of targeting both initiations and responses and a minimum of two conversational turns included a range in terms of the complexity of the behaviors modeled in the videos and the granularity of the data collection and reported results that offer guidance for the current study. In terms of the complexity of the skills modeled in the video model, the most common approach was to create multiple-turn scripts of verbal communication (Maione & Mirenda, 2006;Sherer et al, 2001;Taylor et al, 1999;Charlop & Milstein, 1989) sometimes paired with nonverbal actions such as eye contact (Tetrault & Lerman, 2010) or play actions with toys (Kim, 2016;MacDonald et al, 2009). However, some modeled extended scripts of more than a dozen verbal phrases and more than ten conversation turns (Kim, 2016;MacDonald et al, 2009;Maione & Mirenda, 2006) while others modeled much shorter phrases and only three conversation turns (Charlop & Milstein, 1989.…”

“…In terms of the complexity of the skills modeled in the video model, the most common approach was to create multiple-turn scripts of verbal communication (Maione & Mirenda, 2006;Sherer et al, 2001;Taylor et al, 1999;Charlop & Milstein, 1989) sometimes paired with nonverbal actions such as eye contact (Tetrault & Lerman, 2010) or play actions with toys (Kim, 2016;MacDonald et al, 2009). However, some modeled extended scripts of more than a dozen verbal phrases and more than ten conversation turns (Kim, 2016;MacDonald et al, 2009;Maione & Mirenda, 2006) while others modeled much shorter phrases and only three conversation turns (Charlop & Milstein, 1989. In one case (Mason et al, 2012), the conversations in the video models were not scripted in advance and were instead examples of truly spontaneous and natural conversation, without describing details regarding turns or number of verbalizations.…”

“…Two of the studies collected and reported peer data to compare to the data for the participants with ASD and two used observations of peers to identify normative examples of their independent variable of helping skills. One of the studies did not involve peers in any way (Kim, 2016, focused on social play with mothers and fathers) and another (Scattone, 2008), used peers as activity partners only in a single generalization probe).…”

“…Nearly all of the studies looked for some form of generalization in the results, but three did not (Mason et al, 2016;Plavnick et al, 2013;and Scattone, 2008). Two others looked for generalized results and found no generalization results (Sherer et al, 2001) or very limited or inconsistent ones (Kim, 2016;MacDonald et al, 2009;Sansosti & Powell-Smith, 2008;Thiemann & Goldstein, 2001). The most common measure of generalization for the conversation studies was unscripted verbalizations (n= 4), while the most common generalization reported for the studies of verbal and nonverbal communication were setting generalization (n=6) and stimuli (n=6) such as across play sets or toys or across helping situations.…”