The Effects of the Cool Versus Not Cool Procedure to Teach Social Game Play to Individuals Diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder.

This study evaluated the utility of the cool versus not cool procedure for teaching three structured indoor games to eight children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The study took place as part of a social skills group for individuals diagnosed with ASD, and this study was one component of that group. The cool versus not cool procedure consisted of the teacher demonstrating each game the cool (i.e., appropriate) and not cool (i.e., inappropriate) way and having the participants provide a rationale as to why the demonstration was either cool or not cool. This was followed by giving the participants the opportunity to role-play the game in front of the group. The teachers utilized unprompted performance probes with no programmed reinforcement to create opportunities for the participants to display the targeted behavior (s). A multiple baseline design across behaviors and replicated across participants was utilized. The results indicated that seven of the eight participants mastered each of the games taught.

Social Thinking®: Science, Pseudoscience, or Antiscience?

Today, there are several interventions that can be implemented with individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Most of these interventions have limited to no empirical evidence demonstrating their effectiveness, yet they are widely implemented in home, school, university, and community settings. In 1996, Green wrote a chapter in which she outlined three levels of science: evidence science, pseudoscience, and antiscience; professionals were encouraged to implement and recommend only those procedures that would be considered evidence science. Today, an intervention that is commonly implemented with individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder is Social Thinking®. This intervention has been utilized by behaviorists and non-behaviorists. This commentary will outline Social Thinking® and provide evidence that the procedure, at the current time, qualifies as a pseudoscience and, therefore, should not be implemented with individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, especially given the availability of alternatives which clearly meet the standard of evidence science.

Evaluation of multiple-alternative prompts during tact training.

This study compared 2 methods of fading prompts while teaching tacts to 3 individuals who had been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The 1st method involved use of an echoic prompt and prompt fading. The 2nd method involved providing multiple-alternative answers and fading by increasing the difficulty of the discrimination. An adapted alternating-treatments design showed that both procedures were more effective than a no-intervention control condition. Providing multiple alternatives did not increase error rates or teaching time, and better maintenance was shown for tacts taught with the multiple-alternative prompt.

Changing preference from tangible to social activities through an observation procedure.

Individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have qualitative impairments in social interaction and often prefer food or tangible reinforcement to social reinforcement. Thus, therapists who work with children with ASD often use food or tangible items as reinforcers to increase appropriate behaviors or decrease problem behaviors. The goal of the present study was to shift children's preferences from a highly preferred tangible item to an initially nonpreferred social reinforcer using an observational conditioning procedure. Participants observed a known peer engage in a simple task and select the social reinforcer that was not preferred by the participant. This procedure resulted in a shift of preference toward the social reinforcer by all participants. Maintenance data showed that although the preference change did not maintain for 1 of the participants, it was quickly reestablished with additional observational trials. Results provide further support for the use of observational procedures to alter preferences.

Erratum to: Social Thinking®: Science, Pseudoscience, or Antiscience?

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1007/s40617-016-0108-1.].

Comparing the teaching interaction procedure to social stories: a replication study.

This study compared the teaching interaction procedure to social stories implemented in a group setting to teach social skills to three children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. The researchers taught each participant one social skill with the teaching interaction procedure, one social skill with the social story procedure, and one social skill was assigned to a no intervention condition. The teaching interaction procedure consisted of didactic questions, teacher demonstration, and role-play; the social story procedure consisted of reading a book and answering comprehension questions. The researchers measured participants' performances during probes, responses to comprehension questions, and responding during role-plays. The results indicated that the teaching interaction procedure was more efficacious than the social story procedure across all three participants.

Observational effects on the preferences of children with autism.

Children with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may play with limited objects or toys, making it difficult for teachers to identify reinforcers to use in teaching new skills. The goal of this study was to alter children's preferences from highly preferred toys to toys that were originally less preferred using an observational pairing procedure. Child participants observed a preferred adult playing with toys that were initially less preferred by the child. This intervention resulted in a shift in preference toward the item manipulated by the adult. Maintenance of the changed preference was idiosyncratic across participants. Results suggest a procedure for expanding the range of items that students with ASD will select.

Comparing the teaching interaction procedure to social stories for people with autism.

This study compared social stories and the teaching interaction procedure to teach social skills to 6 children and adolescents with an autism spectrum disorder. Researchers taught 18 social skills with social stories and 18 social skills with the teaching interaction procedure within a parallel treatment design. The teaching interaction procedure resulted in mastery of all 18 skills across the 6 participants. Social stories, in the same amount of teaching sessions, resulted in mastery of 4 of the 18 social skills across the 6 participants. Participants also displayed more generalization of social skills taught with the teaching interaction procedure to known adults and peers.