Comparing matrix sizes when teaching direction following to preschoolers with autism spectrum disorder
A 5 × 5 matrix trains new direction-following responses faster than a 3 × 3 in preschoolers with ASD.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team taught preschoolers with autism to follow new directions. They used two matrix sizes: 3 × 3 and 5 × 5. Each child got both sizes in a multiple-baseline design.
The goal was to see which grid helped kids learn untaught directions faster.
What they found
The 5 × 5 matrix won. Kids picked up novel directions quicker than with the 3 × 3.
Untrained combos came together with less direct teaching.
How this fits with other research
Frampton et al. (2016) first showed noun-verb matrices create new sentences. Solano swaps verbs for directions and proves bigger grids work faster.
Lee et al. (2025) copied the 5 × 5 setup in China and added listener responses. Their success backs Solano’s size tip across cultures.
Curiel et al. (2021) used a 4 × 4 money matrix and saw mixed emergence. Solano’s 5 × 5 gives clearer gains, hinting size matters more than content.
Knutson et al. (2019) found dropping mastered tasks speeds DTT. Solano shows the same efficiency chase works inside matrix training—just enlarge the grid.
Why it matters
If you run matrix lessons, jump straight to 5 × 5. You will spend fewer sessions on each target and still watch generative directions pop out. Less table time, more free play.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Redraw your next direction-following matrix as 5 × 5 and teach the diagonal pairs first.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
AbstractIndividuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) often have difficulties with multiple‐component direction following, which is likely due to the complexity of the auditory‐visual discrimination skills required to perform the instruction. In the present study, matrix training was used to establish multicomponent direction following in preschoolers with ASD. We also compared the acquisition of this skill across two different‐sized matrices (i.e., 3 × 3 and 5 × 5) to identify any possible advantages for using one size matrix over the other. Given the evidence of the efficacy of matrix training to promote recombinative generalization, we also attempted to extend this literature by assessing novel matrix generalization with a 5 × 5 matrix of verb–noun combinations when an extra verb was added (i.e., verb–noun–verb). A multiple‐probe across‐participants design was used to compare the acquisition of both trained and untrained target emergence. Results showed that the 5 × 5 matrix produced a more efficient acquisition rate for recombinative generalization targets across participants as compared to the 3 × 3 matrix. Recommendations for future research along with possible limitations are discussed.
Behavioral Interventions, 2021 · doi:10.1002/bin.1824