Jaclyn Bober 1

Autism Intervention Research

Jaclyn Bober

Y420- Educational Research

September 30, 2008

 Jaclyn Bober 2

The purpose of this research was to work with and study students who have autism. This

was done through interventions designed to reduce their stereotypy behaviors (hand flapping,

rocking back and forth, etc), also known as repetitive motor behaviors. Secondly, the study

aimed to increase the student’s social initiations and interactions. The overlying questions for this

experiment were “Does an intervention package including peer training, direct social initiation

training, and self-monitoring lead to increased social interactions and ensuing interactions?” and

“Does the intervention package lead to a collateral decrease in repetitive motor behavior?”

(Loftin et al, 2007). To answer these questions, the researchers studied three students who were

identified by school personal to have Autism Spectrum Disorder. Each were male and between

the ages of nine and ten who exhibited many repetitive motor behaviors and lack of social

interaction with others (Loftin et al, 2007).

When working with these three students, the study always remained within a school

setting. The intervention took place during recess and lunch (a fifty minute time period) at an

elementary school in Indiana (Loftin et al, 2007). Each day the researchers took a five minute

observation of the students’ stereotypy behaviors, social initiation and social interaction. They

observed and collected data for 10 seconds (s) and then recorded the data for the next 10 s. This

continued for 15 intervals. For this experiment social initiation was defined as “…the participant

starting an interaction with a peer(s) with whom there has not been an interaction during the

previous 5 s”, social interaction was defined as “…any verbal or gestural behavior directed

towards the child with autism or the peer within 5 s after an initiation or an ensuing response”

(Loftin et al, 2007). Lastly, the repetitive motor behaviors were defined based on the individual

students’ behavior.
 Jaclyn Bober 3

In order to work with the students, the researchers made sure that their tests were

socially valid. They did this by administering a survey, and receiving needed parental, school,

and governmental consent. Also, prior to data collection, the researchers spent time gathering

information on the participant’s behaviors in multiple settings. To collect data the researchers

worked with the students in peer training, social initiation instruction and self-monitoring. Within

peer training the researchers worked to reinforce the child with autism to make eye contact and

initiate play with others (Loftin et al, 2007). During the social initiation instruction the

researchers worked with the students to have conversations based on a specific topic (Loftin et

al, 2007). These conversations were initiated during the lunch period. The self-monitoring

section of the research was based on a target goal for each student. The goal was to initiate a

conversation with a peer. The student counted their interactions individually with a counter on

their wrist. Each time they initiated a conversation from scratch, it counted and positively

reinforced (Loftin et al, 2007). Each of the data collections involved direct interactions and

observations.

After the data was collected, the researchers calculated each of the three sections

separately. In all three cases the student’s social interactions and social initiations increased, and

the repetitive motor behaviors decreased (Loftin et al, 2007). After the sessions were over, the

researchers returned to see if the skills which were taught had continued. In all three cases they

had continued, but not at the rate of the original self-monitoring process. To answer the initial

questions, yes, social training did increase the amount of interaction and initiation, as well as

decreasing stereotypy behaviors. While the results were not ideal, they did show that with

continued work, the strategies used were effective for students with autism.
 Jaclyn Bober 4

While the work was effective for the students, the study was limited. The students had

“off” days and the environment was not always consistent. Loftin et al (2007) mentioned that

there were days when the conversation partners were absent, the school played music in the

cafeteria, etc. These environmental changes made an impact for the students who have autism.

Furthermore, the research was done with humans. This was a barrier for the researchers due to

the fact that they could not manipulate every situation. They chose students that had very similar

profiles, but they only chose three participants. This is not a very large sample size for a social

experiment. They did gather a fair amount of data, but the study should be repeated for

reliability.

Looking at the data that was collected, despite the limitations of the study, one can see

that this research was worthwhile. Researchers understand that socialization is the key deficit for

students who have autism. Anyone who has read about autism knows that it remains

misunderstood by science and that students are being diagnosed daily. This study adds applicable

knowledge of autism to the education world. These students are in the classroom and they need

to be receiving proper services. Since scientists know little about the origins of this disorder,

learning how to work effectively with this population is imperative. The questions proposed by

Loftin and his research team improve educator’s abilities to help this population.

Taking the original questions to the next level by using them in future studies would be

important research. The researchers should go to another school, another environment, and study

more students who have been identified with autism. They should expand on this study and see

how reliable the data is when compared with numerous students. If their methods are as high-

quality as they seem within the originals set of data, they should remain reliable when expanded
 Jaclyn Bober 5

to other students. This study has capabilities of breakthroughs in working with students that are

misunderstood.

After working with students who have been identified with autism, I understand the

frustration and confusion that occurs daily. The social piece that is important to all humans is a

weakness for this population of students. Students with autism may better understand concepts

which are logical and methodical. Unfortunately, understanding others emotions and talking

about them is often not methodical. Many times, when given directions in a step-by-step order,

students who have autism are able to learn. A valuable lesson that I have learned from this study

is that it is possible make socialization logical and method based. The researchers taught the

students how to socialize step-by-step. They walked up to a person, they said hello, they asked a

question, they responded, etc. These are steps which the students were able to follow. By

recognizing the student ability to follow steps, the researchers’ methods were more affective. As

a future educator of students with special needs, finding strategies to help students learn is

valuable and important.

 Jaclyn Bober 6

Works Cited

Loftin, R.L., Odom, S.L., & Lantz, J.F. (2007). Social interactions and repetitive motor

behaviors. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 38, 1124-1138.