Cited by 75Behavioral and Psychological StudiesAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchHuman Resource Development and Performance Evaluation

Interactive computer training to teach discrete-trial instruction to undergraduates and special educators in Brazil: A replication and extension

Higbee, Thomas S., Aporta, Ana Paula, Resende, Alice, Nogueira, Mateus, Goyos, Celso, Pollard, Joy S.·2016·Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis

Abstract

Discrete-trial instruction (DTI) is a behavioral method of teaching young children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) that has received a significant amount of research support. Because of a lack of qualified trainers in many areas of the world, researchers have recently begun to investigate alternative methods of training professionals to implement behavioral teaching procedures. One promising training method is interactive computer training, in which slides with recorded narration, video modeling, and embedded evaluation of content knowledge are used to teach a skill. In the present study, the effectiveness of interactive computer training developed by Pollard, Higbee, Akers, and Brodhead (2014), translated into Brazilian Portuguese, was evaluated with 4 university students (Study 1) and 4 special education teachers (Study 2). We evaluated the effectiveness of training on DTI skills during role-plays with research assistants (Study 1) and during DTI sessions with young children with ASD (Studies 1 and 2) using a multiple baseline design. All participants acquired DTI skills after interactive computer training, although 5 of 8 participants required some form of feedback to reach proficiency. Responding generalized to untaught teaching programs for all participants. We evaluated maintenance with the teachers in Study 2, and DTI skills were maintained with 3 of 4 participants.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jaba.329

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Higbee, T. S., Aporta, A. P., Resende, A., Nogueira, M., Goyos, C., & Pollard, J. S.
Affiliations
  • Utah State University (US)
  • Universidade Federal de São Carlos (BR)
Corresponding author
Higbee, Thomas S.
Venue
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-06-17
Volume
49
Issue
4
Pages
780-793
ISSN
0021-8855 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2444221756
Cited by
75
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3
FWCI
12.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Human Resource Development and Performance Evaluation
Keywords
discrete trial instruction, autism spectrum disorder, special education teachers, teacher professional development, video modeling, skill acquisition, maintenance, generalization, Brazilian Portuguese translation, role play
MeSH terms
Autism Spectrum Disorder, Adult, Brazil, Child, Child, Preschool, Computer-Assisted Instruction, Education, Special, Educational Measurement, Female, Humans, Male, Students, Teaching, Universities, Treatment Outcome, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review