Video-based intervention for individuals with autism: Key questions that remain unanswered

Abstract

Research on variations of video-based intervention (VBI) suggests that they can be effective for teaching individuals with disabilities a range of socially significant behaviors. Among the relevant studies and reviews, particular emphasis has been given to applications of these procedures for participants diagnosed with autism. The term ‘video-based intervention’ is a broad term used here to be inclusive of procedures that involve presenting video footage as the independent variable for intervention. Thus, VBI conceptually includes approaches described as video modeling, video prompting, video self-modeling, computer-based video instruction and video priming. Five specific reviews were selected to provide a broad evaluation of these intervention approaches. The range of target behaviors studied is summarised and a conceptual framework of procedural types is offered. While various dimensions of intervention effectiveness have been identified, this paper underscores the fact that important practical and theoretical questions regarding VBI remain largely unanswered.

Introduction

The nature and prevalence of developmental disabilities such as autism has encouraged the exploration of a plethora of different treatment types in the hope of improving the quality of life for autistic individuals and their families (Green et al., 2006; Jacobson, Foxx, & Mulick, 2005; Metz, Mulick, & Butter, 2005; Sigafoos, Green, Edrisinha, & Lancioni, 2007). Among the educational approaches to treatment for this population, an increasing number of research studies have investigated various forms of video-based intervention (VBI) with the purpose of teaching adaptive behaviors and reducing problem behaviors (Ayres & Langone, 2005; Bellini & Akullian, 2007; Buggey, 1995b, Buggey, 2007, Delano, 2007, Dowrick, 1999; Hitchcock, Dowrick, & Prater, 2003; McCoy & Hermansen, 2007; Mechling, 2005, Sturmey, 2003). The term ‘video-based intervention’ is a broad term used here to be inclusive of procedures that involve presenting video footage as the independent variable for intervention. Thus, VBI conceptually includes approaches described as video modelling (VM) (Sigafoos, O’Reilly, & de la Cruz, 2007), video prompting (VP) (Cannella et al., 2006), video self-modeling (Buggey, 2005), computer-based video instruction (CBVI) (Mechling, Pridgen, & Cronin, 2005) and video priming (Schreibman, Whalen, & Stahmer, 2000).

The core explanations for the effectiveness of VBI procedures relate to the principles of observational learning and imitation (Ayres & Langone, 2005; Bandura, 1977, Mechling, 2005; Nikopoulos & Keenan, 2006). While VBI has been used successfully for typically developing individuals as well as people with a range of diagnoses, the preference for visual processing and learning approaches has been noted as a factor contributing to the success of such interventions for individuals with autism (Bellini & Akullian, 2007; Buggey, 2005; Nikopoulos & Keenan, 2006).

The relative strength of individuals with autism in regard to processing visual stimuli is well established in the literature (Ayres & Langone, 2005; McCoy & Hermansen, 2007; Nikopoulos & Keenan, 2006; Sigafoos, O’Reilly, & de la Cruz, 2007). In his landmark paper, Kanner (1943, p. 250), noted that the children he observed seemed to maintain a far better relationship with pictures of people than with the actual people themselves. More recently, Grandin (1996) who describes her own life with autism, wrote:

‘I think in pictures. Words are like a second language to me. I translate both spoken and written words into full-color movies, complete with sound, which run like a VCR tape in my head. When somebody speaks to me, his words are instantly translated into pictures.’ (p. 1)

Imitation abilities are disproportionately impaired in autism, and according to Smith, Lowe-Pearce, and Nichols (2006), the majority of recently reported screening measures for autism include at least one item related to imitation. However, using video as a medium reportedly improves stimulus control and attention to the behaviors being modeled (Sturmey, 2003). Furthermore, Sigafoos, O’Reilly, and de la Cruz (2007) suggest that in comparison with some traditional forms of evidence-based intervention, using VM or VP (types of VBI) may require less expertise, be easier to ensure instructional consistency, be less labour intensive and more cost effective in the long term.

Nevertheless, VBI procedures are still in their theoretical infancy and more research is needed to ensure such procedures are carried out effectively and reliably. With a primary focus on relevant reviews and their associated intervention studies involving VBI for individuals with disabilities, this paper provides a targeted discussion of this relatively new field of research and highlights several key questions that, to date, remain unanswered.