Cited by 592Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchLanguage Development and DisordersChild and Animal Learning Development

Language outcome in autism: randomized comparison of joint attention and play interventions

Kasari, Connie, Paparella, Tanya, Freeman, Stephanny, Jahromi, Laudan B.·2008·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

This study reports results of a randomized controlled trial aimed at joint attention (JA) and symbolic play (SP) in preschool children with autism, with prediction to language outcome 12 months later. Participants were 58 children (46 boys) with autism between 3 and 4 years of age. Children were randomized to a JA intervention, an SP intervention, or control group. Interventions were conducted 30 min daily for 5-6 weeks. Assessments of JA skills, SP skills, mother-child interactions, and language development were collected at 4 time points: pre- and postintervention and 6 and 12 months postintervention by independent testers. Results indicate that expressive language gains were greater for both treatment groups compared with the control group, and results could not be explained by differences in other interventions in which children participated. For children beginning treatment with the lowest language levels, the JA intervention improved language outcome significantly more than did the SP or control interventions. These findings suggest clinically significant benefits of actively treating JA and SP skills in young children with autism.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-006x.76.1.125

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • In that study, children also demonstrated significantly greater spoken language scores one year after the end of intervention.

    “Not only did joint attention skills improve relative to the control group but children also demonstrated significantly greater spoken language scores one year after the end of intervention.26”
  • In that study, children receiving the play intervention also demonstrated significantly improved language scores one year later.

    “In this study, children receiving the play intervention also demonstrated significantly improved language scores one year later”
  • Both of the comprehensive intervention programs (Early Start Denver Model and UCLA/Lovaas model) and the 4 targeted interventions (focusing on social communication or imitation skills) exhibited significantly improved outcomes relative to comparison groups after therapeutic durations of 8 weeks to 2 to 3 years.

    “both of the comprehensive intervention programs (Early Start Denver Model [ESDM] and the UCLA/Lovaas model) and the 4 targeted interventions (focusing on social communication or imitation skills) exhibited significantly improved outcomes relative to comparison groups after therapeutic durations of 8 weeks to 2 to 3 years.”
  • Several of the 6 studies reported effect sizes: large effect sizes after 6 and 8 weeks of therapy for increases in joint attention skills, a moderate effect size after 12 months for expressive language growth, and small effect sizes after 13 months for parent-child interaction measures.

    “Several of the 6 studies reported effect sizes: large effect sizes after 6 and 8 weeks of therapy for increases in joint attention skills, 20 , 32 a moderate effect size after 12 months for expressive language growth, 33 and small effect sizes after 13 months for parent–child interaction measures. 18”
  • Teaching joint attention or play skills within an ABA program increased their spontaneous occurrence in generalized contexts and predicted greater language outcomes compared with children in an ABA program without a focus on play and joint attention.

    “Teaching these skills increased their spontaneous occurrence in generalized contexts and further predicted greater language outcomes compared with the children in the ABA program without a focus on play and joint attention. 33 , 59”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kasari, C., Paparella, T., Freeman, S., & Jahromi, L. B.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Arizona State University (US)
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
2008
Volume
76
Issue
1
Pages
125-137
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W2007805073
Cited by
592
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 48 · 2013: 55 · 2012: 39
FWCI
11.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD035470)
  • Collaborative Programs of Excellence in Autism Network
  • University of California
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, joint attention, pretend play, language outcomes, expressive language development, preschool children, early intervention, mother-child interaction, language intervention
MeSH terms
Attention, Autistic Disorder, Child, Preschool, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Language Development Disorders, Language Therapy, Male, Nonverbal Communication, Play and Playthings, Speech Perception, Symbolism, Outcome Assessment, Health Care

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