{"title":"支持自闭症谱系障碍患者恰当地谈论自己喜欢的话题的当前和未来方向1","authors":"J. Chan","doi":"10.1080/17489539.2021.2008141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Design: A multi-element reversal design was used in Experiment 1 to compare interventions that reinforced On-Topic, Problematic, and On-Topic + Preferred speech. For seven of the eight participants, caregiver implementation of intervention was implemented as an additional phase. In Experiment 2, the authors reported cumulative number of selections of intervention type for five participants who participated in concurrent-chains preference assessments. Total minutes of selection of intervention type were reported for three participants who participated in free-operant preference assessments. Allocation: In Experiment 1, all participants received interventions in the same order. In Experiment 2, the authors did not describe how participants were chosen to participate in either concurrent-chains or free-operant preference assessments. Blinding: Although not stated, it appears that the experimenters and data collectors were not blind to the purposes of the study. Study duration: Experiment 1 consisted of 25–75 sessions across participants, with 6–9 sessions per day, 1–2 days per week. Although not stated by the authors, Experiment 2 appears to consist of 8–36 sessions for participants who participated in concurrent-chains preference assessments and 4–8 sessions for participants in the freeoperant condition, with 2 sessions per week. Setting: The study was conducted at a university campus, participants’ schools, and participants’ homes. Participants: Participants were seven children and adolescents with autism aged 8– 14 and one adult with ADHD, aged 44. Participants were selected based on 1Abstracted from: Stocco, C. S., Saavedra, I., Fakharzadeh, S., Patel, M. R., & Thompson, R. H. (2021). A comparison of intervention for problematic speech using reinforcement with and without preferred topics. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 54(1), 217–230.","PeriodicalId":39977,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention","volume":"10 1","pages":"214 - 217"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Current and future directions of supporting people with autism spectrum disorder to appropriately speak about preferred topics1\",\"authors\":\"J. Chan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17489539.2021.2008141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Design: A multi-element reversal design was used in Experiment 1 to compare interventions that reinforced On-Topic, Problematic, and On-Topic + Preferred speech. For seven of the eight participants, caregiver implementation of intervention was implemented as an additional phase. In Experiment 2, the authors reported cumulative number of selections of intervention type for five participants who participated in concurrent-chains preference assessments. Total minutes of selection of intervention type were reported for three participants who participated in free-operant preference assessments. Allocation: In Experiment 1, all participants received interventions in the same order. In Experiment 2, the authors did not describe how participants were chosen to participate in either concurrent-chains or free-operant preference assessments. Blinding: Although not stated, it appears that the experimenters and data collectors were not blind to the purposes of the study. Study duration: Experiment 1 consisted of 25–75 sessions across participants, with 6–9 sessions per day, 1–2 days per week. Although not stated by the authors, Experiment 2 appears to consist of 8–36 sessions for participants who participated in concurrent-chains preference assessments and 4–8 sessions for participants in the freeoperant condition, with 2 sessions per week. Setting: The study was conducted at a university campus, participants’ schools, and participants’ homes. Participants: Participants were seven children and adolescents with autism aged 8– 14 and one adult with ADHD, aged 44. Participants were selected based on 1Abstracted from: Stocco, C. S., Saavedra, I., Fakharzadeh, S., Patel, M. R., & Thompson, R. H. (2021). A comparison of intervention for problematic speech using reinforcement with and without preferred topics. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 54(1), 217–230.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39977,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"214 - 217\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17489539.2021.2008141\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17489539.2021.2008141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
Current and future directions of supporting people with autism spectrum disorder to appropriately speak about preferred topics1
Design: A multi-element reversal design was used in Experiment 1 to compare interventions that reinforced On-Topic, Problematic, and On-Topic + Preferred speech. For seven of the eight participants, caregiver implementation of intervention was implemented as an additional phase. In Experiment 2, the authors reported cumulative number of selections of intervention type for five participants who participated in concurrent-chains preference assessments. Total minutes of selection of intervention type were reported for three participants who participated in free-operant preference assessments. Allocation: In Experiment 1, all participants received interventions in the same order. In Experiment 2, the authors did not describe how participants were chosen to participate in either concurrent-chains or free-operant preference assessments. Blinding: Although not stated, it appears that the experimenters and data collectors were not blind to the purposes of the study. Study duration: Experiment 1 consisted of 25–75 sessions across participants, with 6–9 sessions per day, 1–2 days per week. Although not stated by the authors, Experiment 2 appears to consist of 8–36 sessions for participants who participated in concurrent-chains preference assessments and 4–8 sessions for participants in the freeoperant condition, with 2 sessions per week. Setting: The study was conducted at a university campus, participants’ schools, and participants’ homes. Participants: Participants were seven children and adolescents with autism aged 8– 14 and one adult with ADHD, aged 44. Participants were selected based on 1Abstracted from: Stocco, C. S., Saavedra, I., Fakharzadeh, S., Patel, M. R., & Thompson, R. H. (2021). A comparison of intervention for problematic speech using reinforcement with and without preferred topics. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 54(1), 217–230.
期刊介绍:
Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention (EBCAI) brings together professionals who work in clinical and educational practice as well as researchers from all disciplines to promote evidence-based practice (EBP) in serving individuals with communication impairments. The primary aims of EBCAI are to: Promote evidence-based practice (EBP) in communication assessment and intervention; Appraise the latest and best communication assessment and intervention studies so as to facilitate the use of research findings in clinical and educational practice; Provide a forum for discussions that advance EBP; and Disseminate research on EBP. We target speech-language pathologists, special educators, regular educators, applied behavior analysts, clinical psychologists, physical therapists, and occupational therapists who serve children or adults with communication impairments.