Frampton Sarah E, Robinson Hannah C, Conine Daniel E, Delfs Caitlin H
Marcus Autism Center, 1920 Briarcliff Road NE, Atlanta, GA 30329 USA.
Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA USA.
Behav Anal Pract. 2017 Feb 13;10(2):131-144. doi: 10.1007/s40617-017-0175-y. eCollection 2017 Jun.
We assessed the efficiency of tact and listener training for eight participants with autism spectrum disorder. Tact and listener probes were conducted in baseline for all target sets, and then tact training was initiated with one and listener training with another. Following mastery of one set, tact and listener probes were conducted with only the sets assigned to the same modality of training (i.e., sets 1, 3, and 5 for tact; sets 2, 4, and 6 for listener). Training and probes were repeated for all sets. The measures of efficiency included the number of skills mastered through direct training, the number of skills that emerged without training, the number of trials-to-criterion, and maintenance of skills. Clinical programming based on each participant's results is discussed. For six participants, tact training was more efficient than listener training across multiple measures. For the remaining two participants, tact training and listener training were considered equivalent.
我们评估了针对八名自闭症谱系障碍患者的触觉和倾听者训练的效果。针对所有目标集在基线阶段进行了触觉和倾听者探测,然后对其中一组开始触觉训练,对另一组开始倾听者训练。掌握一组后,仅对分配到相同训练模式的组进行触觉和倾听者探测(即,触觉训练的第1、3和5组;倾听者训练的第2、4和6组)。对所有组重复进行训练和探测。效率指标包括通过直接训练掌握的技能数量、未经训练而出现的技能数量、达到标准的试验次数以及技能的保持情况。讨论了基于每个参与者结果的临床规划。在多项指标上,六名参与者的触觉训练比倾听者训练更有效。对于其余两名参与者,触觉训练和倾听者训练被认为效果相当。