Task Interspersal Implementation Practices with Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder
Clinicians keep picking same-difficulty tasks even though older studies show learners prefer and profit from mixed difficulty.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Bottini et al. (2019) sent a survey to ABA providers who work with kids with autism. They asked how staff mix easy and hard tasks during teaching.
What they found
Most staff pick tasks that are all the same difficulty. They trust their gut, not the research. The survey shows big gaps between what science says and what happens at the table.
How this fits with other research
Gaily et al. (1998) already showed that adults with profound ID prefer task variety over drill. Their choice test gave early proof that varied tasks feel better.
Najdowski et al. (2003) review lists mixed-difficulty interspersal as an evidence-based play tactic. The 2019 survey reveals that this tactic is still missing in day-to-day work.
Ellingsen et al. (2014) ran a similar survey and also found staff stray from low-intrusion guidelines. Both papers flag the same problem: clinicians rely on habit, not manuals.
Why it matters
If you supervise RBTs, write a one-page task-interspersal script. State when to slip an easy task between hard ones and when to probe mastered targets. Post it at each table and check it during overlap. You will close the gap between the 1998 choice data and 2019 field practice in one week.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Tape a quick script to each table: after two hard trials, slide in one mastered task, then return to hard — start today.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Task interspersal is a teaching method frequently used with individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Although many different procedural variations of task interspersal have been reported in the literature, it is unclear how providers serving individuals with ASD implement task interspersal. The present study surveyed direct care providers to examine which variations of task interspersal they use most frequently, as well as how they choose a particular variation. Results revealed that many different procedural variations are used across providers. Provider discipline background appeared to be associated with differences in selection of specific procedural variations. Findings inform areas for further research as well as consideration of topics for discussion during training and/or supervision with employees and trainees. (1) Providers report frequently interspersing tasks of similar difficulty, despite research supporting the practice of interspersing tasks of varying difficulty. Service providers might consider primarily implementing maintenance among acquisition tasks when using task interspersal. (2) Due to potential problems associated with using the same reinforcement schedules/reinforcers for both tasks (e.g., satiation), providers and supervising BCBAs are encouraged to consider whether using different reinforcement schedules/reinforcers will enhance acquisition outcomes. (3) When selecting a procedural variation, providers reported relying on clinical judgment or guidelines from their organizations more frequently than directly contacting the current literature. It is important that organizations and supervisors provide clear guidelines and recommendations based on the most recent scientific literature and update these as new research is published. (4) Individualization of procedures based on specific client characteristics was found to be inconsistent. Supervisors are encouraged to discuss individualization practices for cases in which consistency of treatment across providers is preferred or necessary for maintenance of skills.
Behavior Analysis in Practice, 2019 · doi:10.1007/s40617-018-0229-9