Godby S, Gast D L, Wolery M
University of Kentucky, Lexington 40506.
Res Dev Disabil. 1987;8(2):283-305. doi: 10.1016/0891-4222(87)90009-6.
This study is a comparison of two response prompting procedures: Progressive time delay and system of least prompts. Three students with severe handicaps were each taught to identify eight functional objects, four objects with each prompting procedure. The procedures were compared in terms of effectiveness (establishing criterion level correct responding) and efficiency, (sessions and trials to criterion, errors to criterion, and the number of minutes of direct instructional time). A combination of two concurrently operating multiple probe designs (Parallel Treatments Design) in which extraneous variables were counterbalanced across sessions was employed. An analysis of the results indicates that both prompting procedures were effective in establishing correct responding at criterion levels, but the time delay procedure required fewer sessions, trials, and errors to criterion, and fewer minutes of direct instruction time than did the system of least prompts. Issues for further comparative research are discussed.
渐进式时间延迟和最少提示系统。三名重度残疾学生分别被教导识别八个功能性物品,每种提示程序各对应四个物品。从有效性(建立标准水平的正确反应)和效率(达到标准所需的课时和试验次数、达到标准的错误次数以及直接教学时间的分钟数)方面对这两种程序进行了比较。采用了两种同时运行的多重探测设计(并行处理设计)的组合,其中无关变量在各课时之间进行了平衡。结果分析表明,两种提示程序在建立标准水平的正确反应方面都是有效的,但与最少提示系统相比,时间延迟程序达到标准所需的课时、试验次数和错误次数更少,直接教学时间的分钟数也更少。文中还讨论了进一步进行比较研究的相关问题。