ArticleBehavior analysis in practice2019
Task Interspersal Implementation Practices with Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Article in Behavior analysis in practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Task interspersal is a teaching method frequently used with individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Although many different procedural variations of task interspersal have been reported in the literature, it is unclear how providers serving individuals with ASD implement task interspersal. The present study surveyed direct care providers to examine which variations of task interspersal they use most frequently, as well as how they choose a particular variation. Results revealed that many different procedural variations are used across providers. Provider discipline background appeared to be associated with differences in selection of specific procedural variations. Findings inform areas for further research as well as consideration of topics for discussion during training and/or supervision with employees and trainees. (1) Providers report frequently interspersing tasks of similar difficulty, despite research supporting the practice of interspersing tasks of varying difficulty. Service providers might consider primarily implementing maintenance among acquisition tasks when using task interspersal. (2) Due to potential problems associated with using the same reinforcement schedules/reinforcers for both tasks (e.g., satiation), providers and supervising BCBAs are encouraged to consider whether using different reinforcement schedules/reinforcers will enhance acquisition outcomes. (3) When selecting a procedural variation, providers reported relying on clinical judgment or guidelines from their organizations more frequently than directly contacting the current literature. It is important that organizations and supervisors provide clear guidelines and recommendations based on the most recent scientific literature and update these as new research is published. (4) Individualization of procedures based on specific client characteristics was found to be inconsistent. Supervisors are encouraged to discuss individualization practices for cases in which consistency of treatment across providers is preferred or necessary for maintenance of skills.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.