MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014173076 · doi:10.1177/215416472005500108

Comparing the Effects of Echoic Prompts and Echoic Plus Picture Prompts on Establishing Intraverbal Behavior for Children with Autism

2020· article· en· W3014173076 on OpenAlexaff
Sheng Xu, Ruihua Niu, Gabrielle T. Lee, Lina Gilic, Hua Feng, Weiting Shao

Bibliographic record

VenueEducation and training in autism and developmental disabilities · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEchoic memoryAutismPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyAutism spectrum disorderNonverbal communicationCognitionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficiency of two prompt strategies (echoic versus echoic + picture) on establishing the intraverbal behavior (i.e., question answering) for three 4-year-old children with ASD in China. All three children had mand, tact, and echoic behavior in their repertoire, but had a limited intraverbal repertoire. An adapted alternating treatments design combined with a multiple probe across two behaviors (two question sets) was used. Results indicated that both strategies were effective to teach and maintain question answering for all three children. However, the echoic prompt strategy required fewer trials to criterion than the echoic plus picture strategy, suggesting the efficiency of echoic prompts to establish intraverbal repertoire for these children.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducation and training in autism and developmental disabilitiesSame topicBehavioral and Psychological StudiesFrench-language works237,207