Incorporating additional targets into learning trials for individuals with autism spectrum disorder.

Ohan et al. (2015) looked at every paper they could find on sneaking extra targets into DTT lessons for kids with autism. They did not run new kids; they read the old stories. The goal was to see if you can teach more skills in the same 10-minute block.

The review says yes—kids often pick up the extra target without more teaching time. The trick is to slip it in as a ‘secondary’ target while the main lesson keeps going. The authors call the move promising but say we need more real data.

Yanchik et al. (2024) extends the idea. They blended NET moments into DTT for toddlers and saw bigger adaptive-skill jumps than DTT alone. Their mix shows one way to add those secondary targets in real life.

Dell’Aringa et al. (2021) looks like a clash but is not. They tried transfer trials versus plain DTT and found no speed gain. The difference: they swapped trial style, not added content. L et al. kept the trial style and just dropped in extra words—no extra steps, so no slow-down.

Eisenhower et al. (2006) layered joint-attention targets onto DTT/PRT for preschoolers and got language bonuses. That mirrors the review’s claim: piggy-back targets can bloom into new skills without longer sessions.

If you run 60 trials per hour, slipping one extra target into half of them could give you 30 free learning opportunities. Start small: while the child labels ‘apple,’ also have them point to red. Track the secondary target for a week. If scores rise without extra time, you just gained instructional efficiency.