Comparing procedures on the acquisition and generalization of tacts for children with autism spectrum disorder

Schnell and team compared three ways to teach new object names to kids with autism.

They used serial training, concurrent training, and concurrent training plus instructive feedback.

Each child tried all three methods in an alternating-treatments design until they could name new items in new places.

All three setups worked; every child learned the names and used them with new toys and new adults.

Two kids reached mastery fastest with serial training—one item at a time.

The third child did best when extra names were tossed in as instructive feedback while he learned the main set.

Bouck et al. (2016) also used multiple-exemplar training, but they taught rule following instead of object names.

Both studies show the same core idea: give many examples, and kids with autism can use the skill in new spots.

Northgrave et al. (2019) used the same alternating-treatments design to ask what speeds learning; they found adult-chosen reinforcers beat child-chosen ones, lining up with Schnell’s push for efficiency.

MacDonald et al. (2015) and DeQuinzio et al. (2015) used multiple exemplars too, but for observational learning and social cues; Schnell’s work tells us the order of those exemplars can matter as much as the number.

You now have a quick decision tree for tact programs. Start with serial training; if the child stalls, pivot to concurrent plus instructive feedback instead of grinding on.

Track trials to mastery each session—two data points will tell you which track that learner is on.