Comparing Error Correction to Errorless Learning: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Error correction teaches tacts as well as errorless learning and gives kids more chances to respond on their own.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Leaf and team ran a randomized trial with kids with autism. They compared two ways to teach tact labels: errorless learning and error correction.
Each child got one method. Sessions used discrete trials. The goal was to see which style gave more independent correct tacts without extra problem behavior.
What they found
Both groups learned the labels. Error correction kids gave more independent correct and incorrect responses. Problem behavior stayed low in both groups.
Bottom line: letting kids try and sometimes fail did not hurt learning or spike behavior.
How this fits with other research
Arantes et al. (2011) showed errorless learning beat trial-and-error with pigeons. Leaf’s study now shows the same idea works with children, but error correction can work just as well.
Matson et al. (2011) used the same alternating-treatments design for receptive labels. They found skipping early steps sped up learning. Leaf adds that for tacts, you can also skip errorless prompts and still succeed.
Ribeiro et al. (2020) warned that re-teaching a new tact to an old picture takes longer. Leaf’s finding gives a practical fix: use error correction from the start and you still get fast acquisition.
Why it matters
You no longer need to choose between errorless and error correction for tact programs. Either one teaches the label, but error correction gives more independent tries. That extra practice may help later intraverbal questions. Next time you run tact trials, feel safe letting the child attempt the answer before you prompt.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Run the first tact trial without a prompt; deliver praise or correction after the child’s response.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Errorless learning and error correction procedures are commonly used when teaching tact relations to individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Research has demonstrated the effectiveness of both procedures, as well as compared them. The majority of these studies have been completed through the use of single-subject experimental designs. Evaluating both procedures using a group design may contribute to the literature and help disseminate research related to the behavioral science of language to a larger audience. The purpose of the present study was to compare an errorless learning procedure to an error correction procedure to teach tact relations to 28 individuals diagnosed with ASD through a randomized clinical trial. Several variables were assessed, including the number of stimulus sets with which participants reached the mastery criterion, responding during pre- and postprobes, responding during teaching, efficiency, and the presence of aberrant behavior. The results indicated that both procedures were effective, efficient, and unlikely to evoke aberrant behavior, despite participants in the error correction condition engaging in significantly more independent correct responses and independent incorrect responses.
The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 2020 · doi:10.1007/s40616-019-00124-y