Comparing In-View to Out-of-View Stimulus Arrangements When Teaching Receptive Labels for Children Diagnosed With Autism Spectrum Disorder

Garvey et al. (2022) asked a simple question: should you hide the picture choices until you give the instruction, or let the child see them the whole time?

They taught receptive labels to three children with autism using two setups. In one, the comparison pictures stayed in full view. In the other, the pictures were covered until the teacher said the word.

An alternating-treatments design flipped the setups across daily sessions so each child tried both ways.

All three kids reached mastery with either setup, but the in-view arrangement was always the faster road. Sessions needed fewer trials and less total time when the pictures never left the child’s sight.

No child learned better with the covered-choice method.

The result lines up with Bergmann et al. (2023). They added pictures to auditory tact training and also saw quicker, cleaner learning with compound stimuli.

Dittlinger et al. (2011) looks like a contradiction—those authors found that pictures slowed sight-word reading. The difference is the skill: Harper taught kids to read the printed word aloud, while Garvey taught them to touch the correct picture. Pictures help receptive selection but can overshadow printed words when the goal is expressive reading.

Vedora et al. (2015) ran a similar isolated-versus-compound test with toddlers and found no clear winner. Their verbal-behavior format and younger sample may explain the flatter outcome.

If you run receptive-label DTT, leave the comparison pictures on the table. You will probably need fewer trials and the child still masters the labels. Covering choices adds an extra memory step that these children did not need. Try it next session: set the cards down, give the instruction, and let the child point—no covers required.