Practical implications of evaluating the efficiency of listener and tact instruction for children with autism.

Schroeder et al. (2014) wrote a how-to paper for BCBAs who teach kids with autism. They looked at past work on two skills: saying what you see (tact) and picking when you hear (listener).

The authors asked, 'Which route saves time? Teach tact first, listener first, or both?' They gave step-by-step probes you can run in clinic tomorrow.

The paper has no new data. Instead it says: after you teach one skill, test the other right away. If the child passes, you just saved teaching time.

They list quick probe sheets and warn that some kids need both directions taught anyway.

Cortez et al. (2020) ran the same tact-vs-listener race with neurotypical preschoolers learning Spanish. Tact instruction won—kids spoke more new words without extra teaching. That lab result backs the clinic tip H et al. give.

May et al. (2016) flipped the order. They taught listener and intraverbal only, then watched tacts appear. It worked—three preschoolers still named pictures they had never been asked to name. This extends H’s advice: even if you start with listener, check for the free tact.

Frampton et al. (2024) add a side note: while you probe, watch for small reaching or pointing signs. Those ‘indicator’ responses show the child wants the item and makes the tact probe more fair.

Next time you run a tact or listener program, spend two minutes on the opposite probe. If the child gets it free, you can skip that target and move on. Over a month this can cut hours of table time and give you space to teach other skills.