Comparing the Effectiveness of Error-Correction Strategies in Discrete Trial Training

Abstract

Error-correction strategies are essential considerations for behavior analysts implementing discrete trial training with children with autism. The research literature, however, is still lacking in the number of studies that compare and evaluate error-correction procedures. The purpose of this study was to compare two error-correction strategies: Independent Probe and Delay across learners with autism in an intensive intervention program. Two studies were conducted. The first study compared the two procedures across receptive tasks for 3 individuals, and differential effects were seen across learners. The second study compared the two procedures across tact trials with two of the same learners and found that individual differences were noted, but in addition, the more effective error-correction strategy was consistent across the two verbal operants (i.e., receptive in Study 1, tacts in Study 2). These combined studies suggest the effectiveness of error-correction strategies may be individualized to the learner but may generalize across operants.