Using Antecedent and Functional Analyses to Conduct a Treatment Comparison on Echolalia

Kaye and colleagues set up a quick test for kids who echo. First they tried small antecedent probes to see what sparks the echo. Then they ran a short functional analysis to confirm why the child repeats words.

After the checks, the team compared two treatments in the same child. One plan matched the echoed function; the other did not. They flipped the plans across days to see which cut echolalia more.

The paper only gives the road map; no numbers are posted yet. Still, the authors stress one point: check the function first, then pick the fix.

Perez et al. (2015) used the same brief-experiment style for reading deficits in kids with ADHD. Both studies swap conditions fast to find the best fit for one child, showing the method works beyond reading.

Reichow (2012) looked at huge early-ABA trials and found big IQ gains. Kaye zooms in on one tiny behavior—echoing—so the new study extends the big-program reviews down to a single topographical target.

Brown et al. (2024) warn that mastering one verbal skill does not spill into another. Kaye’s plan to tie the intervention to the exact echo function echoes that caution: teach the skill that matches the cause.

You can copy the two-step screen tomorrow. Run a five-minute antecedent probe, then a 10-minute functional analysis. If escape drives the echo, teach the child to ask for a break instead of repeating you. If it is attention, teach a greeting or show-and-tell response. Match first, treat second—no guesswork.