Naturalistic approaches show higher mean PND than contrived approaches for maintenance of language skills¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2008 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The mean PND score for maintenance was 88% for naturalistic programming compared to 82% for contrived approaches, a difference of 5.7%. → Kane 2008

Evidence¶

Kane 2008¶

Kane, M., Connell, J. E., & Pellecchia, M. (2008). A Quantitative Analysis of Language Interventions for Children with Autism. The Behavior Analyst Today, 11(2). https://eric.ed.gov/?q=A+Quantitative+Analysis+of+Language+Interventions+for+Children+with+Autism

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Maintenance PND scores came from only 3 of 22 studies for contrived approaches (11 scores) and 4 of 22 studies for naturalistic approaches (20 scores). The article states "The difference between the two means was 5.7%"; both means were considered effective by Scruggs and Mastropieri's criteria.

"The mean PND score for maintenance for contrived approaches was 82%, compared to a mean PND of 88% for maintenance with naturalistic approaches."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Oral Language — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Contrived approaches show greater generalization of spoken language skills than naturalistic approaches in children with autism — related
• Naturalistic language interventions produce higher mean PND than contrived interventions during intervention conditions for children with autism — related
• Conducting maintenance and generalization phases was significantly associated with higher PND scores than treatment-only cases — related