COMPARISON OF SIMULTANEOUS PROMPTING AND NO‐NO PROMPTING IN TWO‐CHOICE DISCRIMINATION LEARNING WITH CHILDREN WITH AUTISM

Justin B. Leaf · Jan Bowen Sheldon · James A. Sherman

78 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Applied Behavior Analysis

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Behavioral and Psychological Studies Autism Spectrum Disorder Research Child Nutrition and Feeding Issues

Abstract

This study compared no-no prompting procedures to simultaneous prompting procedures for 3 children with autism. Using a parallel treatments design, researchers taught rote math skills, receptive labels, or answers to "wh-" questions with both prompting systems. Results indicated that no-no prompting was effective in teaching all skills. By contrast, simultaneous prompting was effective in teaching only one pair of skills to 1 participant in the same amount of teaching time and trials. Researchers conducted a preference assessment to determine which of the two prompting procedures the 3 participants preferred. The participants showed mixed preferences for the two procedures.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 78 citations exist upstream.

References

1992A COMPARISON OF TWO APPROACHES FOR IDENTIFYING REINFORCERS FOR PERSONS WITH SEVERE AND PROFOUND DISABILITIES 2001Discrete Trial Training in the Treatment of Autism 1997EVALUATION OF CLIENT PREFERENCE FOR FUNCTION‐BASED TREATMENT PACKAGES 2009VIDEO MODELING TO TRAIN STAFF TO IMPLEMENT DISCRETE‐TRIAL INSTRUCTION 2005ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF AND PREFERENCE FOR PUNISHMENT AND EXTINCTION COMPONENTS OF FUNCTION‐BASED INTERVENTIONS 1970TRAINING GENERATIVE VERB USAGE BY IMITATION AND REINFORCEMENT PROCEDURES1 1992Comparison of simultaneous prompting and constant time delay procedures in teaching sight words to elementary students with moderate mental retardation 2003A Comparison of Constant Time Delay and Simultaneous Prompting Within Embedded Instruction in General Education Classes with Students with Moderate to Severe Disabilities

Cited by

2016Discrete Trial Training 2017A Review of Prompt-Fading Procedures: Implications for Effective and Efficient Skill Acquisition 2016A Progressive Approach to Discrete Trial Teaching: Some Current Guidelines 2020Increasing engagement in students with autism in inclusion classrooms

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.