Three dimensional reconstructions of the superior olivary complex from children with autism spectrum disorder

Typically developing (TD) children exhibit a transfer deficit imitating significantly less from screen demonstrations compared to a live demonstrations. Although many interventions for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) include video materials, little research exists comparing the effectiveness of video demonstration over live instruction. The current study compared imitation learning from live and screen-based demonstrations of how to make a puzzle by 3- to 4.5-year-old TD children (n = 68) and children with ASD (n = 17). Children were tested on either on a three-dimensional (3D) magnet board (MB) with magnetic puzzle pieces or a 2D touch screen (TS) with virtual puzzle pieces. Neither TD nor ASD children exhibited a transfer deficit suggesting that for this task, the transfer deficit ends around 3 years of age. Children with ASD were less efficient overall than TD children on the task and performed worse than their TD counterparts when they were tested with the 3D MB puzzle. These findings suggest that children with ASD have greater difficulty acting on 3D objects than 2D TSs. Future studies should investigate if TSs can be used to teach children with ASD other tasks (184 words).

Download Full-text

Instruction Using Augmentative and Alternative Communication Supports: Description of Current Practices by Speech-Language Pathologists Who Work With Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder

American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology ◽

10.1044/2019_ajslp-19-00045 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 29 (2) ◽

pp. 586-596 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Kaitlyn A. Clarke ◽

Diane L. Williams

Keyword(s):

Autism Spectrum Disorder ◽

Augmentative And Alternative Communication ◽

Communication Systems ◽

Diagnostic Category ◽

Children With Autism ◽

Autism Spectrum ◽

Spectrum Disorder ◽

Alternative Communication ◽

Speech Language Pathologists ◽

Processing Differences

Purpose The aim of this research study was to examine common practices of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) who work with children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) with respect to whether or not SLPs consider processing differences in ASD or the effects of input during their instruction. Method Following a qualitative research method, how SLPs instruct and present augmentative and alternative communication systems to individuals with ASD, their rationale for method selection, and their perception of the efficacy of selected interventions were probed. Semistructured interviews were conducted as part of an in-depth case report with content analysis. Results Based on completed interviews, 4 primary themes were identified: (a) instructional method , (b) input provided , (c) decision-making process , and (d) perceived efficacy of treatment . Additionally, one secondary theme, training and education received , was identified . Conclusions Clinicians reported making decisions based on the needs of the child; however, they also reported making decisions based on the diagnostic category that characterized the child (i.e., ASD). The use of modeling when teaching augmentative and alternative communication to individuals with ASD emerged as a theme, but variations in the method of modeling were noted. SLPs did not report regularly considering processing differences in ASD, nor did they consider the effects of input during instruction.

Download Full-text