The Effects of a High-Probability Instruction Sequence with Combined Reinforcers Using a 10s Inter-Instruction Interval among Autistic Children

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Bander M. Alotaibi
2010 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 735-738 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew P. Normand ◽  
Kathryn Kestner ◽  
Joshua Jessel

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 1783-1797
Author(s):  
Kelly L. Coburn ◽  
Diane L. Williams

Purpose Neurodevelopmental processes that begin during gestation and continue throughout childhood typically support language development. Understanding these processes can help us to understand the disruptions to language that occur in neurodevelopmental conditions, such as autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Method For this tutorial, we conducted a focused literature review on typical postnatal brain development and structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging, diffusion tensor imaging, magnetoencephalography, and electroencephalography studies of the neurodevelopmental differences that occur in ASD. We then integrated this knowledge with the literature on evidence-based speech-language intervention practices for autistic children. Results In ASD, structural differences include altered patterns of cortical growth and myelination. Functional differences occur at all brain levels, from lateralization of cortical functions to the rhythmic activations of single neurons. Neuronal oscillations, in particular, could help explain disrupted language development by elucidating the timing differences that contribute to altered functional connectivity, complex information processing, and speech parsing. Findings related to implicit statistical learning, explicit task learning, multisensory integration, and reinforcement in ASD are also discussed. Conclusions Consideration of the neural differences in autistic children provides additional scientific support for current recommended language intervention practices. Recommendations consistent with these neurological findings include the use of short, simple utterances; repetition of syntactic structures using varied vocabulary; pause time; visual supports; and individualized sensory modifications.


2002 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 4-5

Abstract Different jurisdictions use the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) for different purposes, and this article reviews a specific jurisdictional definition in the Province of Ontario of catastrophic impairment that incorporates the AMA Guides. In Ontario, a whole person impairment (WPI) exceeding 54% or a mental or behavioral impairment of Class 4 or 5 qualifies the individual for catastrophic benefits, and individuals who do not meet the test receive a lesser benefit. By inference, this establishes a parity threshold among dissimilar injuries and dissimilar outcome assessment scales for benefits. In Ontario, the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) identifies patients who have a high probability of death or of severely disabled survival. The GCS recognizes gradations of vegetative state and disability, but translating the gradations for rating individual impairment on ordinal scales into a method of assessing percentage impairments cannot be done reliably, as explained in the AMA Guides, Fifth Edition. The AMA Guides also notes that mental and behavioral impairment in Class 4 (marked impairment) or 5 (extreme impairment) indicates “catastrophic impairment” by significantly impeding useful functioning (Class 4) or significantly impeding useful functioning and implying complete dependency on another person for care (Class 5). Translating the AMA Guides guidelines into ordinal scales cannot be done reliably.


Author(s):  
Hadar Ram ◽  
Dieter Struyf ◽  
Bram Vervliet ◽  
Gal Menahem ◽  
Nira Liberman

Abstract. People apply what they learn from experience not only to the experienced stimuli, but also to novel stimuli. But what determines how widely people generalize what they have learned? Using a predictive learning paradigm, we examined the hypothesis that a low (vs. high) probability of an outcome following a predicting stimulus would widen generalization. In three experiments, participants learned which stimulus predicted an outcome (S+) and which stimulus did not (S−) and then indicated how much they expected the outcome after each of eight novel stimuli ranging in perceptual similarity to S+ and S−. The stimuli were rings of different sizes and the outcome was a picture of a lightning bolt. As hypothesized, a lower probability of the outcome widened generalization. That is, novel stimuli that were similar to S+ (but not to S−) produced expectations for the outcome that were as high as those associated with S+.


1990 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-22
Author(s):  
Lee M. Marcus
Keyword(s):  

PsycCRITIQUES ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 51 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fawzy Ebrahim

1984 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. L. Koegel ◽  
L. Schreibman ◽  
R. E. O'Neill ◽  
J. C. Burke
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document