"A Comparison of Prompt Delays with Trial and Error Instruction in Conditional Discrimination Training"

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Many prompting procedures exist for teaching skills to individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Intellectual Disability; however, direct comparisons between variations of prompt delay are rarely made. Here we compared three variations of prompt delay (2-s or 5-s constant delay and 5-s progressive delay) alongside trial and error instruction. Four learners were taught a conditional discrimination task using a match-to-sample arrangement. Performances were compared using effectiveness and efficiency measures in an adapted alternating treatments design. A procedural modification, in the form of differential reinforcement, was applied to the prompt delay procedure for two of the four participants. Despite this procedural modification, results suggest progressive prompt delay may be effective and most efficient in reducing learner errors during instruction.
LanguageEnglish
Pages370–380
Number of pages11
JournalBehavior Analysis In Practice
Volume11
Issue number4
Early online date23 May 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 31 Dec 2018

Fingerprint

Intellectual Disability
Teaching
Efficiency
Discrimination (Psychology)
Reinforcement (Psychology)
Autism Spectrum Disorder

Keywords

  • ASD
  • Prompts
  • Delayed prompts
  • Trial and error

Cite this

@article{671bb036bc124db49356e557af51e0a9,
title = "{"}A Comparison of Prompt Delays with Trial and Error Instruction in Conditional Discrimination Training{"}",
abstract = "Many prompting procedures exist for teaching skills to individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Intellectual Disability; however, direct comparisons between variations of prompt delay are rarely made. Here we compared three variations of prompt delay (2-s or 5-s constant delay and 5-s progressive delay) alongside trial and error instruction. Four learners were taught a conditional discrimination task using a match-to-sample arrangement. Performances were compared using effectiveness and efficiency measures in an adapted alternating treatments design. A procedural modification, in the form of differential reinforcement, was applied to the prompt delay procedure for two of the four participants. Despite this procedural modification, results suggest progressive prompt delay may be effective and most efficient in reducing learner errors during instruction.",
keywords = "ASD, Prompts, Delayed prompts, Trial and error",
author = "Sean O'Neill and Claire McDowell and Julian Leslie",
note = "UIR Compliant - evidence uploaded to other files",
year = "2018",
month = "12",
day = "31",
doi = "10.1007/s40617-018-0261-9",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
pages = "370–380",
journal = "Behavior Analysis In Practice",
issn = "1998-1929",
number = "4",

}

"A Comparison of Prompt Delays with Trial and Error Instruction in Conditional Discrimination Training". / O'Neill, Sean; McDowell, Claire; Leslie, Julian.

In: Behavior Analysis In Practice, Vol. 11, No. 4, 31.12.2018, p. 370–380.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - "A Comparison of Prompt Delays with Trial and Error Instruction in Conditional Discrimination Training"

AU - O'Neill, Sean

AU - McDowell, Claire

AU - Leslie, Julian

N1 - UIR Compliant - evidence uploaded to other files

PY - 2018/12/31

Y1 - 2018/12/31

N2 - Many prompting procedures exist for teaching skills to individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Intellectual Disability; however, direct comparisons between variations of prompt delay are rarely made. Here we compared three variations of prompt delay (2-s or 5-s constant delay and 5-s progressive delay) alongside trial and error instruction. Four learners were taught a conditional discrimination task using a match-to-sample arrangement. Performances were compared using effectiveness and efficiency measures in an adapted alternating treatments design. A procedural modification, in the form of differential reinforcement, was applied to the prompt delay procedure for two of the four participants. Despite this procedural modification, results suggest progressive prompt delay may be effective and most efficient in reducing learner errors during instruction.

AB - Many prompting procedures exist for teaching skills to individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Intellectual Disability; however, direct comparisons between variations of prompt delay are rarely made. Here we compared three variations of prompt delay (2-s or 5-s constant delay and 5-s progressive delay) alongside trial and error instruction. Four learners were taught a conditional discrimination task using a match-to-sample arrangement. Performances were compared using effectiveness and efficiency measures in an adapted alternating treatments design. A procedural modification, in the form of differential reinforcement, was applied to the prompt delay procedure for two of the four participants. Despite this procedural modification, results suggest progressive prompt delay may be effective and most efficient in reducing learner errors during instruction.

KW - ASD

KW - Prompts

KW - Delayed prompts

KW - Trial and error

U2 - 10.1007/s40617-018-0261-9

DO - 10.1007/s40617-018-0261-9

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 370

EP - 380

JO - Behavior Analysis In Practice

T2 - Behavior Analysis In Practice

JF - Behavior Analysis In Practice

SN - 1998-1929

IS - 4

ER -