A Comparison of Video Prompting to Least-to-Most Prompting among Children with Autism and Intellectual Disability.

Aljehany et al. (2020) asked which prompt style teaches office tasks faster to teens with autism and intellectual disability. They used an alternating-treatments design. Each teen tried the same three tasks under two prompt types: video prompting and least-to-most prompting.

Two teens learned faster with video prompting. One teen learned better with least-to-most prompting, but it took more trials. The winner was not the same for every learner.

Wertalik et al. (2023) later topped this work. They added brief speed drills to video prompting and got stronger skill retention in a similar teen group. Their update shows video prompting can be pushed further than Salman found.

Schnell et al. (2020) seems to clash at first. They report least-to-most fading was most efficient for every child tested. The gap is age and task: Schnell worked with younger kids on simple responses, while Salman worked with teens on multi-step office work. Different jobs need different tools.

Bradford et al. (2018) backs Salman's choice of video prompting. Paras used short clips to teach schoolwork to elementary students with autism and ID and saw quick gains. The pattern holds: video helps when tasks have clear steps.

Start with video prompting for vocational tasks in middle-schoolers with ASD and ID. Track data early. If the teen stalls, switch to least-to-most prompting and keep measuring. One size does not fit all, but video gives you the faster win most of the time.