Len Levin, Ph.D. Kara Lee, M.A., BCBA Jessica Ann Korneder, M.A., BCBA Tiffany Bauer, M.A., BCBA

1. ACQUISITION OF SPONTANEOUS EYE CONTACT DURING TEACHING INTERACTIONS: THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SHAPING TECHNIQUES WITHOUT PROMPTS Len Levin, Ph.D. Kara Lee, M.A., BCBA Jessica Ann Korneder, M.A., BCBA Tiffany Bauer, M.A., BCBA Melissa L. Evans, M.S. Coyne and Associates

2. Introduction • Deficits in visual attending/eye contact is a commonly reported characteristic of Autistic Disorder (DSM-IV, 2000) • Prompting and prompt-fading strategies in response to a vocal SD (“Look at me” or calling child’s name) are commonly used techniques to ameliorate deficit (Foxx, 1977; Lovaas, 1981) Coyne & Associates - 2009

3. Introduction • In our treatment and education program, spontaneous eye contact (SEC) is a pre-requisite for Discrete-Trial Teaching interactions • Usually implemented during initial weeks of early intervention • Relies on SHAPING/DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT rather than prompting and prompt-fading Coyne & Associates - 2009

4. Introduction • Learners in our program learn to initiate eye contact with the instructor whenever there is a pause in the teaching interaction: • Within 5 seconds of consuming reinforcer • Within 5 seconds of responding to an instruction Coyne & Associates - 2009

5. Purpose Experiment 1 To demonstrate that the initial step of shaping protocol teaches the learner to initiate eye contact with instructor within 5 seconds of termination of preferred activity Experiment 2 To demonstrate that the subsequent steps of the protocol teach the learner to continually “check in” with the instructor each time the learner performs a response Coyne & Associates - 2009

6. Experiment 1 PARTICIPANTS • Six children • 4 boys, 2 girls • Age range = 24 to 36 months • At risk for autism • Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention Coyne & Associates - 2009

7. Experiment 1 RESEARCH DESIGN • Multiple Baseline Across Participants • Two demonstrations: • San Diego consumers • Orange County consumers Coyne & Associates - 2009

8. Experiment 1 BASELINE PROCEDURE 1. Child seated next to or across from instructor 2. Child watching portable DVD player 3. Instructor turns off DVD and records whether or not child initiates eye contact within 5 seconds 4. Instructor waits an additional 5 seconds (i.e., total of 10 seconds) before re-starting DVD player. Coyne & Associates - 2009

9. Experiment 1 INTERVENTION PROCEDURE 1. Child seated next to or across from instructor 2. Child watching portable DVD player 3. Instructor turns off DVD player and records whether or not child initiates eye contact within 5 seconds 4. Instructor turns on DVD when child makes eye contact Coyne & Associates - 2009

10. Experiment 1 INTERVENTION PROCEDURE • Child can be prompted to remain seated, to sit with appropriate posture, or to place hands down on table, but direct prompting of eye contact was not implemented • Typically, reinforced responses during initial stage of implementation of shaping procedure are not as “clean” as the terminal response Coyne & Associates - 2009

11. Experiment 1 INTERVENTION PROCEDURE Differential Reinforcement to decrease latency Incorrect Response ( > 5 seconds)  access DVD for 10 - 30 seconds Correct Response ( ≤ 5 seconds)  access DVD for 40 - 60 seconds Coyne & Associates - 2009

12. Shaping Eye Contact Coyne & Associates - 2009

13. Shaping Eye Contact Coyne & Associates - 2009

14. Results San Diego Coyne & Associates - 2009

15. Results Orange County Coyne & Associates - 2009

16. Experiment 2 PARTICIPANTS Six children, all boys Age range = 24 to 36 months At risk for autism Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention Different participants than Experiment 1 although all Experiment 2 participants received Experiment 1 intervention before participation in Experiment 2 Coyne & Associates - 2009

17. Experiment 2 RESEARCH DESIGN Changing criterion design: The criterion for reinforcement changed across conditions in that the participant was required to respond to increasingly more high-probability requests and establish eye contact after each response before the reinforcer (i.e., access to DVD) was delivered Coyne & Associates - 2009

18. Experiment 2 Condition 1 Procedure (1 high-p) 1. Child seated next to or across from instructor 2. Child watching portable DVD player 3. Instructor turns off DVD player and records whether or not child initiated eye contact within 5 seconds 4. When child establishes eye contact, instructor delivers high-p request; instructor records whether or not child establishes eye contact within 5 seconds of performing response Yields 2 opportunities per trial Coyne & Associates - 2009

19. Condition 1 Coyne & Associates - 2009

20. Experiment 2 Condition 2 Procedure (2 high-p) 1. Child seated next to or across from instructor 2. Child watching portable DVD player 3. Instructor turns off DVD player and records whether or not child initiated eye contact within 5 seconds 4. When child establishes eye contact, instructor delivers high-p request; instructor records whether or not child establishes eye contact within 5 seconds of performing response 5. When child establishes eye contact, instructor delivers second high-p request; instructor records whether or not child establishes eye contact within 5 seconds of performing second response 2 yields 3 opportunities per trial Coyne & Associates - 2009

21. Condition 2 Coyne & Associates - 2009

22. Experiment 2 Condition 3 Procedure (3 high-p) 1. Child seated next to or across from instructor 2. Child watching portable DVD player 3. Instructor turns off DVD player and records whether or not child initiated eye contact within 5 seconds 4. When child establishes eye contact, instructor delivers high-p request; instructor records whether or not child establishes eye contact within 5 seconds of performing response 5. When child establishes eye contact, instructor delivers second high-p request; instructor records whether or not child establishes eye contact within 5 seconds of performing second response 6. When child establishes eye contact, instructor delivers third high-p request; instructor records whether or not child establishes eye contact within 5 seconds of performing third response Condition 3 yields four opportunities per trial Coyne & Associates - 2009

23. Experiment 2 During all conditions, instructor implements differential reinforcement for latency of eye contact after FINAL OPPORTUNITY of trial Incorrect Response ( > 5 seconds)  Access to DVD for 10 - 30 seconds Correct Response ( ≤ 5 seconds)  Access to DVD for 40 - 60 seconds Coyne & Associates - 2009

24. Experiment 2 SUMMARY OF CONDITIONS/CHANGING CRITERION During all conditions, one data point = 5 trials With number of trials remaining constant, number of opportunities per data point change systematically across conditions CONDITION 1 = 2 Opportunities per trial = 10 per data point CONDITION 2 = 3 Opportunities per trial = 15 per data point CONDITION 3 = 4 Opportunities per trial = 20 per data point Coyne & Associates - 2009

25. Results Coyne & Associates - 2009

26. Results Coyne & Associates - 2009

27. Results Coyne & Associates - 2009

28. Discussion - Clinical Practice Coyne & Associates - 2009 In our treatment and education program, spontaneous eye contact (SEC) is a pre-requisite for Discrete-Trial Teaching interactions The SEC skill acquisition program is Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 combined Is incorporated into all Discrete-Trial Teaching and maintained via intermittent schedule of reinforcement

29. SEC in Discrete Trial Teaching Coyne & Associates - 2009

30. SEC in Discrete Trial Teaching Coyne & Associates - 2009

31. Discussion Coyne & Associates - 2009 In our experience, the protocol described produces better outcomes than traditional, SD - driven approach (e.g., “Look at me”) However, this project did not directly compare efficacy of different strategies to promote eye contact Future research should assess comparative efficacy of different approaches

32. Discussion Coyne & Associates - 2009 One could conceptualize current approach as relying exclusively on Motivating Operations rather than “instructional” discriminative stimuli In this way, protocol is analogous to mand training

33. Discussion Coyne & Associates - 2009 Caregivers frequently report increased spontaneous eye contact in the natural setting after mastery of SEC program in our sessions, especially during manding situations This phenomenon needs to be verified empirically, but if it is true, one could conceptualize that the current protocol facilitates the initiation of eye contact as a functional, “over-generalized” mand

34. Discussion • We speculate that the critical component of the reinforcer (i.e., access to DVD) is that instructor controls onset and offset • If true, then food reinforcers may not be optimal for shaping this skill • This should be examined in future studies Coyne & Associates - 2009

35. Discussion Coyne & Associates - 2009 Does spontaneous eye contact during teaching interactions, as produced by the protocol described, impact the rate of skill acquisition or efficiency of teaching?