Laura Welsh, B.S. & Tina K. Veale, Ph.D. Eastern Illinois University

Transcription

1 Laura Welsh, B.S. & Tina K. Veale, Ph.D. Eastern Illinois University

2 Children with autism display a marked impairment in the use of multiple nonverbal behaviors such as eye-to-eye gaze, facial expression, body postures, and gestures to regulate social interaction (APA, 2000). They also have difficulty developing peer relationships that are age-appropriate, and lack spontaneity in seeking to play and share enjoyment with others.

3 Bass and Mulick (2007) stated that peer-mediated approaches represent the largest and most empirically supported type of social intervention for children with autism. Using siblings as therapists may be beneficial for increasing the social skills of children with autism, specifically in the areas of joint attention, initiation, and responding to sibling social initiation (Bass & Mulick, 2007; El-Ghoroury & Romanczyk, 1999; Tsao & Odom, 2006). Though there is an abundance of information on the success of peer- and sibling-mediated therapy, the literature lacks information that determines which is more successful in eliciting social-pragmatic interaction from the child with autism.

4 1. Do peers and/or siblings impact the social-pragmatic development of children with autism? a. Do children with autism show more joint attention when interacting with peers or siblings? b. Do children with autism show more initiation when interacting with peers or siblings? c. Do children with autism show more turn-taking when interacting with peers or siblings? d. Do children with autism show more imitation when interacting with peers or siblings? 2. What techniques did siblings/peers use to facilitate social-pragmatic skills in children with autism?

5 Five subjects with mild to moderate autism between the ages of 5 and 10 All subjects were observed with a sibling; 3 subjects were observed with a peer Subject 1: DH was a 5-year, 5-month old male who was observed with a 3- year, 2- month old sibling and an 8-year, 1-month old peer. Subject 2: KM was a 5-year, 10-month old male who was observed with a 7- year, 1-month old sibling and a 10-year, 1-month old peer. Subject 3: CC was a 6-year, 1-month old male who was observed with a 2-year, 7- month old sibling. Subject 4: GC was a 5-year, 5-month old female who was observed with a 4- year, 4-month old sibling and a 4-year, 11-month old peer. Subject 5: AL was an 8-year, 2-month old male who was observed with a 6-year,1- month old sibling.

6 Group Comparative Design Data from sibling sessions were compared with data from peer sessions. Procedures Subjects completed minute play sessions with siblings and peers. Analysis was completed for a total of 11 observations with siblings, and 6 observations with peers. Observations occurred in the home or clinical setting. Subjects and siblings/peers were provided with a different toy every 5-10 minutes from a preselected set of 10 activities; No adult interaction was provided during the play sessions.

7 The number of times each subject displayed joint attention, initiation, turn-taking, and imitation was recorded and displayed in graphs for data analysis. Inter-rater reliability was calculated at 91% over 10% of the sessions. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to determine variance between the two groups due to the small sample size and nature of the data.

8 Average Social Behaviors Per Hour Sibs Peers JA Initiation Turn-taking Imitating

9 DH Data Sibling Peer JA Initiation Turn-Taking Imitating

10 KM Data Sibling Peer JA Initiation Turn Taking Imitating

11 GC Data Sibling Peer JA Initiation Turn Taking Imitating

12 There were no statistically significant differences in the number of times subjects displayed joint attention [U(17)=34.5; p=.879], initiation [U(17)=24.5; p=.392], turn taking [U(17)=21.0; p=.227], or imitation [U(17)=22.0; p=.264] with a sibling and a peer.

13 The following were strategies that siblings and peers used to facilitate social-pragmatic interaction from the subjects: Repeating subject s name to gain attention Repeating questions and simplifying questions if no response initially Using hand-over-hand assistance to help the subject participate in activities Making physical contact (e.g., touching arm) to gain attention Verbally cueing subject to take a turn and physically handing objects to take a turn Using multiple verbal and tactile cues

14 Strengths: reliability of data collection; uniform play activities between subjects Limitations: small number of subjects; lack of availability of peers

15 1. Which methods used by siblings/peers are most effective in eliciting social language/behavior from children with autism? 2. Is the amount of social-pragmatic interaction elicited from children with autism directly related to the amount of training that siblings and/or peers have received in providing therapy?

16 American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4 th ed.). Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association. (text revision). Bass, J., & Mulick, J. (2007). Social play skill enhancement of children with autism using peers and siblings as therapists. Psychology in the Schools, 44(7), El-Ghoroury, N., & Romanczyk, R. (1999). Play interactions of family members towards children with autism. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 29(3), Tsao, L., & Odom, S. (2006). Sibling-mediated social interaction intervention for young children with autism. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 26(2),