Teaching autistic children to use extra-stimulus prompts

https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(82)90060-1Get rights and content

Abstract

Autistic children often do not transfer from extra-stimulus prompts, and thus do not utilize a frequent learning aid. It has been hypothesized that this is due to stimulus overselectivity; a failure to respond to simultaneous multiple cues. This study was designed to determine if autistic children who initially respond only to single cues can be taught a set to respond to two cues and subsequently utilize an extra-stimulus (pointing) prompt. Four autistic children were pretested to determine if they could learn a complex visual discrimination by either trial and error or an extra-stimulus prompt fading procedure. Since they did not, the children were then taught to respond to two cues through a multiple-cue training procedure and subsequently tested to determine if they could now utilize a pointing prompt. Results indicated that while all four children initially did not transfer from an extra-stimulus (pointing) prompt, they did so subsequent to multiple-cue training. The results are discussed in terms of implications for treatment (remediating overselectivity) and in relation to normal child development.

References (49)

  • R.C. Anderson et al.

    The effects of strong formal prompts in programmed instruction

    American Educational Journal

    (1967)
  • R.A. Baker et al.

    Discrimination transfer along a pitch continuum

    Journal of Experimental Psychology

    (1964)
  • G.W. Dorey et al.

    The use of a fading technique in paired-associate teaching of a reading vocabulary with retardates

    Mental Retardation

    (1973)
  • P.D. Eimas

    Multiple-cue discrimination learning in children

    The Psychological Record

    (1969)
  • C.B. Ferster et al.

    A method for the experimental analysis of the behavior of autistic children

    American Journal of Orthopsychiatry

    (1962)
  • L. Fields et al.

    The stages of acquisition in stimulus fading

    Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

    (1976)
  • L.W. Gellermann

    Chance orders of alternating stimuli in visual discrimination experiments

    Journal of Genetic Psychology

    (1933)
  • A.W. Gottfried et al.

    Cross modal transfer in human infants

    Child Development

    (1977)
  • B.J. House et al.

    Miniature experiments in the discrimination learning in retardates

  • R.L. Koegel et al.

    Treatment of psychotic children in a classroom environment. I. Learning in a large group

    Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis

    (1974)
  • R.L. Koegel et al.

    Some detrimental effects of using extra-stimuli to guide learning in normal and autistic children

    Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology

    (1976)
  • D.H. Lawrence

    The transfer of discrimination along a continuum

    Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology

    (1952)
  • O.I. Lovaas et al.

    Stimulus overselectivity in autism: A review of research

    Psychological Bulletin

    (1980)
  • O.I. Lovaas et al.

    Selective responding by autistic children to multiple sensory input

    Journal of Abnormal Psychology

    (1971)
  • Cited by (67)

    • Selective attention to visual compound stimuli in squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus)

      2011, Behavioural Processes
      Citation Excerpt :

      Goldfarb and Balant-Campbell (1984) reported that left-brain damaged, aphasic adults preferred color over form more than right-brain damaged, nonaphasic adults, who in turn showed greater preference of color over form than control subjects. Interest in relative preference of stimulus dimensions has a history in the study of individuals with autism because, as has been reported anecdotally and shown experimentally (e.g., Bickel et al., 1984; Colburn, 1984; Gersten, 1983; Hedbring and Newsom, 1985; Koegel and Wilhelm, 1973; Koegel et al., 1979; Matthews et al., 2001; Lovaas et al., 1971; Lovaas and Schreibman, 1971; Ploog and Kim, 2007; Schreibman et al., 1977, 1982, 1986), these individuals appear to be overly fixated on one aspect of a compound stimulus to the exclusion of other aspects. For example, in a landmark study based on Reynolds’ (1961) paradigm, Lovaas et al. (1971) found that autistic children responded on average to one component only, mentally retarded children to two, and typical children to three components.

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    This investigation was supported by USPHS Research Grants MH 28231 and MH28210 from the National Institute of Mental Health and by U.S. Office of Education Research Grant G007802084, from the Bureau of the Education for the Handicapped.

    View full text