Naturalistic language interventions produce higher mean PND than contrived interventions during intervention conditions for children with autism¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2008 · checked against its sources 2026-11-01 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? For intervention effects, contrived approaches scored a mean PND of 65% while naturalistic language interventions scored a mean PND of 83%. → 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

Meta-analysis of 22 single-subject studies (65 participants, mean age 6.2 years) calculating PND from baseline to intervention. A total of 103 PND scores were calculated for contrived interventions and 49 for naturalistic interventions; the mean PND was "65%" for contrived and "83%" for naturalistic.

"For intervention effects, contrived approaches scored a mean PND of 65%, while the mean PND for naturalistic language interventions was 83%."

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 approaches show higher mean PND than contrived approaches for maintenance of language skills — related
• The best teaching approach may vary depending on the skill being taught, warranting research on skills such as eye contact and imitation — related