↓ Skip to main content

Producing speech use in nonverbal autistic children by reinforcing attempts

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, December 1988
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
127 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
Title
Producing speech use in nonverbal autistic children by reinforcing attempts
Published in
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, December 1988
DOI 10.1007/bf02211871
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert L. Koegel, Mary O'Dell, Glen Dunlap

Abstract

It has been extremely difficult to teach speech to severely handicapped nonverbal autistic children. However, an overview of the literature suggests the possibility that selecting aspects of motivation as a central target behavior, rather than concentrating on motor speech production per se, may improve the effectiveness of teaching speech to these children. Therefore, the purpose of this experiment was to compare two different reinforcement conditions; one in which successive motor approximations of speech sounds were reinforced; and a "motivation" condition in which attempts to produce speech sounds were reinforced, without any motor shaping of speech. The results, replicated within a repeated reversal disign, showed that reinforcing speech attempts was more effective than reinforcing motor speech sounds with respect to (a) the children's interest, enthusiasm, happiness, and general behavior during treatment; and (b) improvements in the children's speech production. The results are discussed in terms of their relationship to the literature on normal parent-child speech interaction, success and failure, and learned helplessness.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 71 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 10 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 34 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Arts and Humanities 4 6%
Neuroscience 4 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 11 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 November 2021.
All research outputs
#7,390,600
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#2,687
of 5,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,373
of 55,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,240 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 55,438 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them