Michigan State University,
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012 Oct;55(5):1301-13. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2012/10-0345). Epub 2012 Feb 21.
Developmental social-pragmatic and naturalistic behavioral interventions share a number of features, but they differ in their use of facilitative strategies and direct elicitation of child language. In this study, the authors investigated whether these approaches produce different language and social outcomes in young children with autism.
The authors used an ABACAD design to compare the effects of a developmental social-pragmatic, naturalistic behavioral, and combined intervention on language type and function and social engagement in 5 children with autism.
Milieu teaching and the combined intervention produced higher rates of language targets than did responsive interaction. An analysis of the type and function of language targets suggested that differences between conditions were driven primarily by prompted-and, to a lesser extent, spontaneous-requests. Social engagement ratings were higher during each intervention than at baseline, but differences between treatment conditions were not consistent across children.
For children with autism, naturalistic interventions that use direct elicitation of child language lead to greater short-term gains in the use of expressive language targets-in particular, prompted requests-than interventions that use facilitative strategies only. All 3 naturalistic language interventions can promote social engagement. For some children, the combined use of direct elicitation and responsiveness-based strategies may enhance treatment response.
发展性社交语用和自然主义行为干预有许多共同特征，但它们在促进儿童语言的策略使用和直接引出方面有所不同。本研究旨在探讨这两种方法是否会对自闭症儿童的语言和社交产生不同的结果。
作者采用 ABACAD 设计，比较了发展性社交语用、自然主义行为和联合干预对 5 名自闭症儿童语言类型和功能以及社会参与的影响。
环境教学和联合干预产生的语言目标比率高于反应性互动。对语言目标的类型和功能的分析表明，条件之间的差异主要是由提示和在较小程度上的自发请求驱动的。与基线相比，每个干预期间的社会参与评分都更高，但治疗条件之间的差异在儿童之间并不一致。
对于自闭症儿童，使用直接引出儿童语言的自然主义干预会导致表达性语言目标的短期使用增加，特别是提示请求，而仅使用促进策略的干预则不然。所有 3 种自然主义语言干预都可以促进社会参与。对于一些儿童而言，直接引出和基于反应的策略的联合使用可能会增强治疗反应。
