Incorporating multiple secondary targets into learning trials for individuals with autism spectrum disorder

The team ran an alternating-treatments design with kids on the spectrum.

Some trials taught only the main skill. Other trials slipped in one or two extra targets while the child worked on the same main skill.

They timed how fast each child mastered the primary skill and how many bonus targets were learned along the way.

Any trial that carried extra targets beat the plain trials for teaching speed.

Most kids also picked up the slipped-in targets without extra teaching time.

More targets per trial meant more learning per minute.

Ohan et al. (2015) had already said this trick looks promising, but they only wrote a narrative review and asked for real data. Nottingham et al. (2017) give that data, so the new study moves the idea from "maybe" to "yes, it works."

Ferguson et al. (2020) took the same idea into telehealth dyads. Kids still learned the extra targets while watching a peer on screen, showing the tactic survives distance learning.

Campbell et al. (2024) later added instructive feedback during telehealth DTT and found half the kids gained extra speaker targets. Their partial success lines up with Nottingham’s fuller success, hinting that live, in-person trials may pack more punch than remote ones.

You can squeeze more teaching into the same session by dropping extra targets into each trial. No extra time, no extra tokens, just richer trials. Try it next session: while the child labels "apple," also present a red square and say, "Red." You may pick up both tact and color targets for free.