Cengher Mirela, Shamoun Kimberly, Moss Patricia, Roll David, Feliciano Gina, Fienup Daniel M
Department of Psychology, Queens College and the Graduate Center, CUNY, 65-30 Kissena Blvd., Flushing, NY 11367 USA ; Behavioral Intervention Psychological Services PC, Elmont, NY USA.
Behavioral Intervention Psychological Services PC, Elmont, NY USA.
Behav Anal Pract. 2015 Nov 9;9(2):115-25. doi: 10.1007/s40617-015-0096-6. eCollection 2016 Jun.
Research has demonstrated that most-to-least (MTL) and least-to-most (LTM) prompting are effective in helping children with Autism Spectrum Disorders acquire a variety of new skills. However, when directly compared to one another, the efficiency and efficacy of the prompting procedures have been variable. The inconsistencies in the literature could be due to selecting prompt topographies that do not promote correct responding. To address this, the present study began by assessing different prompt topographies and then compared most-to-least (MTL) and least-to-most (LTM) prompt-fading with only prompt topographies that were potent enough to promote correct responding. The subsequent comparison of prompt-fading procedures revealed that MTL prompting was more effective and efficient than LTM prompting for all three participants. Further implications for practice and future research are discussed.
研究表明，从多到少（MTL）和从少到多（LTM）提示法在帮助自闭症谱系障碍儿童获得各种新技能方面是有效的。然而，当将这两种方法直接相互比较时，提示程序的效率和效果存在差异。文献中的不一致可能是由于选择了不能促进正确反应的提示形式。为了解决这个问题，本研究首先评估了不同的提示形式，然后仅比较了足以促进正确反应的提示形式下的从多到少（MTL）和从少到多（LTM）提示消退法。随后对提示消退程序的比较表明，对于所有三名参与者来说，MTL提示法比LTM提示法更有效率。文中还讨论了对实践和未来研究的进一步启示。
