Teaching of Echoic in People with Autism Spectrum Disorders: Systematic Review of Literature

GUERRA, Bárbara Trevizan; SANTO, Lady Anny Araújo do Espírito; BARROS, Romariz da Silva; ALMEIDA-VERDU, Ana Cláudia Moreira

doi:10.1590/s1413-65382519000400010

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Literature Review • Rev. bras. educ. espec. 25 (4) • Oct-Dec 2019 • https://doi.org/10.1590/s1413-65382519000400010 copy

Teaching of Echoic in People with Autism Spectrum Disorders: Systematic Review of Literature² 2 Financial support: Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) Program/Public Notice Nº. 59/2014 - Scientific and Technological Research in Assistive Technology (PGPTA) for granting a PhD scholarship to the first author. This work is part of the scientific project of the National Institute of Science and Technology on Behavior, Cognition and Teaching (INCT-ECCE): INCT2014 Processes numbers: Sao Paulo State Research Support Foundation (FAPESP): 2014/50909-8; National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq): 465686/2014-1; CAPES: 88887.136407/2017-00.

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT:

Literature has shown a large gap in studies aiming to establish an echoic in people with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Thus, the objective of this study was to identify the collection of research aimed at teaching echoic in individuals with ASD. The review was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematics Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) model. The search, of all occurrences, without time limit, until the year 2018, was performed in the Web of Science, Pubmed, Scopus, ERIC and PsichINFO database. The keywords and boolean operators autism [or] autist [or] autistic [and] echoic [and] verbal behavior were adopted. The inclusion criteria were articles in Portuguese, English and Spanish that established echoic as a dependent variable in interventions with people with ASD, present a single subject experimental design and demonstrate the data of the echoic acquisition during the teaching sessions. As a result, 338 articles were found and, with the application of the inclusion criteria, three were selected. The results corroborate the data in the literature that point out the deficit of studies to establish echoic as the main target of teaching in people with ASD. Most studies adopt echoic as a prompt for establishing other verbal behavior. Even if scarce, the articles indicate the effects of different procedures under the acquisition of the echoic behavior in people with ASD and with diversified initial repertories.

KEYWORDS:
Autism; Teaching; Language; Echoic; Literature Review

Study	Authors	Year	Title	Means of publication
1	Drash, P. W., High, R. L., & Tudor, R., M.	1999	Using manding training to establish an echoic repertoire in young children with autism	The Analysis of Verbal Behavior
2	Esch, B. E., Carr, J. E., & Michael, J.	2005	Evaluating stimulus-stimulus pairing and direct reinforcement in the establishment of an echoic repertoire of children diagnosed with autism	The Analysis of Verbal Behavior
3	Carroll, R. A., & Klatt, K. P.	2008	Using Stimulus-stimulus pairing and direct reinforcement to teach vocal verbal behavior to young children with autism	The Analysis of Verbal Behavior

Study	Age of participants	Number of the sample	Input Repertoire	Evaluation Instrument
1	P1: 2 years and 8 months P2: 2 years and 6 months P3: 3 years and 6 months	3	P1: Initial echoic, impure mand (echoic prompt) P2: Initial echoic, impure mand (echoic prompt) P3: Initial echoic, impure mand (echoic prompt)	None.
2	P1: 6 years and 10 months P2: 6 years and 11 months P3: 8 years and 2 months	3	The three participants presented absence of established verbal behaviors.	Behavioral Language Assessment (BLA) (Sundberg & Partington, 1998Sundberg, M. L., & Partington, J. W. (1998). Teaching language to children with autism or other developmental disabilities. Pleasant Hill, CA: Behavior Analysts, Inc.); Kaufman Speech Praxis Test (KSPT) (Kaufman, 1995Kaufman, N. R. (1995). Kaufman Speech Praxis Test. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.); The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test III (PPVT) (Dunn, Dunn, & Dunn, 1997Dunn, L. M., Dunn, L. M., Dunn, D. M. (1997). Peabody Picture Vocabulary test. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service, Inc.); Receptive-Expressive Emergent Language Test (REEL) (Bzoch, League, & Brown, 2003Bzoch, K. R., League, R., & Brown, V. L. (2003). Receptive-Expressive Emergent Language Teste. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.)
3	P1: 1 year and 10 months P2: 1 year and 11 months	2	P1: absence of established verbal behaviors P2: Established echoic, initial repertoires of mand, tact and intraverbal.	Behavioral Language Assessment (BLA) (Sundberg & Partington, 1998Sundberg, M. L., & Partington, J. W. (1998). Teaching language to children with autism or other developmental disabilities. Pleasant Hill, CA: Behavior Analysts, Inc.)

Number	Length of echoic response and contingency	Other DV of the studies	IV in the teaching of the main dependent variable	Design	Target Response Variability	Number of sessions	Main results	Maintenance Generalization
1	Extension: sounds or words Contingency: Teaching	Mand, tact, errors and lack of answers	Mand and Tact	Not specified. However, the figure suggests a design of Alternate Treatment between teaching conditions.	P1: 70% (30 to 100%) P2: 55% (25% to 83%) P3: 39% (48% to 87%)	P1: 14 P2: 10 P3:11	P1: 100% accuracy for 25 words and 23 sounds. P2: 83% accuracy for 25 words and five sounds. P3: 87% accuracy for 12 words and six sounds.	It does not provide data maintenance or generalization.
2 Exper. 1	Extension: Vowels and Syllables Contingency: Teaching and Testing	None.	Direct reinforcement of the echoic response and Stimulus-Stimulus Pairing	AB multiple baseline between topographies with constant series control	P1: 10% (0 to 10% P2: 10% (0 to 10% P3: 0% (remained at zero the percentage of correct answers)	P1: 114 P2: 65 P3: 77	The procedure was not effective for all three participants.	It does not provide data maintenance or generalization.
Echoic was not established as a DV
Echoic was not established as a DV
3 Exper. 1	Extension: phonemes Contingency: Teaching	Vocalizations similar or equal to the model presented (Stimulus- Stimulus Pairing)	Direct reinforcement of the echoic response.	Not specified for echoic teaching.	P1: 25% (75 to 100%)	P1: 4	The teaching procedure was effective for the participant.	It does not provide data maintenance or generalization.
Exper. 2	Extension: phonemes Contingency: Teaching		Stimulus-stimulus pairing and direct reinforcement (Procedure 1); direct reinforcement without pairing (Procedure 2); direct reinforcement of any vocalization (Procedure 4) and direct reinforcement of the target sound (Procedure 5).	Comparison Design	P2: Proc. 1: 10% (0 to 10%) Proc. 2: 0% (remained at zero the percentage of correct answers) Proc. 4: 43% (47 to 90%) Proc. 5: 55% (45 to 100%) for one sound and 80% for another sound (0 to 80%)	P2: 34	Procedures 4 and 5 were effective for the participant.	Maintenance was conducted for ten weeks and results were maintained at 100% hits.

Associação Brasileira de Pesquisadores em Educação Especial - ABPEE Av. Eng. Luiz Edmundo Carrijo Coube, 14-01 Vargem Limpa, CEP: 17033-360 - Bauru, SP, Tel.: 14 - 3402-1366 - Bauru - SP - Brazil
E-mail: revista.rbee@gmail.com

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS