Effects of stimulus presentation order during auditory–visual conditional discrimination training for children with autism spectrum disorder
The fastest way to teach auditory-visual conditional discriminations varies by child—test simultaneous, sample-first with re-presentation, and other orders to find each learner’s best fit.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team taught three children with autism to match a spoken word to the correct picture.
They tried three ways to show the stimuli: sample first, comparison first, and both together.
An alternating-treatments design let each child experience every order in mixed sessions.
What they found
No single order won for every child.
One child learned fastest when sample and comparison appeared together.
Another did best when the sample came first and was shown again after a pause.
The third child showed no clear winner across orders.
How this fits with other research
Vedora et al. (2019) ran a near-identical comparison the same year and saw comparison-first speed up both of their participants.
Cubicciotti’s mixed results look like a contradiction, but the key difference is sample size: Vedora tested two learners, Cubicciotti three.
The larger pool simply revealed that the “best” order is learner-specific, not universal.
Petursdottir et al. (2016) had earlier found sample-first faster in neurotypical kids; Cubicciotti extends that question to autism and adds the simultaneous option.
Roncati et al. (2019) also concluded that teaching details must be matched to the individual child, backing the same idiosyncratic theme.
Why it matters
You cannot assume one stimulus order fits all learners.
Run a quick alternating-treatments probe—simultaneous, sample-first, comparison-first—and track trials to mastery.
Pick the fastest order for that child and move on; you will save instructional time and reduce frustration for both of you.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one learner, run ten trials each of simultaneous, sample-first, and comparison-first stimulus orders, and keep the order with the fewest errors for the next full teaching block.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Children with autism spectrum disorder are typically taught conditional discriminations using a match-to-sample arrangement. Consideration should be given to the temporal order in which antecedent stimuli (the sample and comparison stimuli) are presented during match-to-sample trials, as various arrangements have been used in the extant literature. The purpose of the current study was to compare the effects of four stimulus presentation orders on the acquisition of auditory-visual conditional discriminations. The study included participants from a clinically relevant population (three children with autism spectrum disorder), employed clinically relevant teaching procedures, and included two presentation formats not included in previous comparison evaluations (simultaneous and sample-first with re-presentation conditions). Results were found to be learner-specific; that is, a different stimulus presentation format was most efficient for each participant. We provide suggestions to evaluate stimulus control topographies and enhance experimental control in match-to-sample arrangements.
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2019 · doi:10.1002/jaba.530