Comparison of Two Maintenance Training Arrangements with Instructive Feedback in Children with Autism

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.111.16172

Keywords:

autism spectrum disorder, primary target, untaught repertoires, instructive feedback

Abstract

Instructive feedback (IF) can improve the efficiency of teaching in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) by establishing emergent skills. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of two types of listener responding maintenance teaching with IF on acquisition of four untaught repertoires in three children with ASD. In one of the teaching cases, attending and tact responses of visual stimuli were required. The emergence was partial for all learners, with no great difference in the efficiency of the types of teaching. Two of the new repertoires were not demonstrated. Errorless performance of some relations was shown by all, but for only one child immediate emergence was verified. The results were discussed regarding the possibility of new investigations on alternative procedure to IF that could produce the emergence of new repertoires.

Downloads

Published

2024-01-07

How to Cite

Matos, D. C., Loureiro, D. J. R., Silva, K. R., & Galvão, P. (2024). Comparison of Two Maintenance Training Arrangements with Instructive Feedback in Children with Autism. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 11(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.111.16172

Issue

Vol. 11 No. 1 (2024): Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Daniel Carvalho de Matos, Danielle Juliana Ribeiro Loureiro, Katiane Reis da Silva, Pollianna Galvão

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors wishing to include figures, tables, or text passages that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright owner(s) for both the print and online format and to include evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers. Any material received without such evidence will be assumed to originate from the authors.