Comparison of Tablet-Delivered and Instructor-Delivered Teaching on Receptive Identification in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of our study was to compare the effectiveness of tablet- and instructor-delivered teaching (i.e., prompting and reinforcement) on the receptive identification of one-word concepts in children with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs). To this end, we embedded a multielement design within a multiple probe design to compare the effectiveness of the two instructional modalities in seven participants. Two of the seven participants showed generalization on all concepts in fewer instructional trials following instructor-delivered teaching, whereas the remaining five participants had mixed results depending on the concept. In total, the participants showed more rapid generalization with the instructor for 14 of the 19 concepts taught. Our results suggest that tablets should not systematically replace instructor-delivered prompting and reinforcement, but that they may be used to provide supplementary teaching to children with ASD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it