Pub Date : 2022-02-22DOI: 10.1177/10483950221075404e
Barton, E. E. (2015). Teaching generalized pretend play and related behaviors to young children with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 8(4), 489–506. Barton, E. E., & Wolery, M. (2010). Training teachers to promote pretend play in young children with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 77(1), 85–106. Saral, D., & Ulke-Kurkcuoglu, B. (2020). Using least-to-most prompting to increase the frequency and diversity of pretend play in children with autism. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education. Advance online publication. https://doi. org/10.1177/0271121420942850 Wetherby, A. M., Woods, J., Allen, L., Cleary, J., Dickinson, H., & Lord, C. (2004). Early indicators of autism spectrum disorders in the second year of life. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(5), 473–493. Table 1. Examples of Symbolic Pretend Behaviors
Barton, e.e.(2015)。对残疾幼儿进行广义假装游戏及相关行为的教学。《特殊儿童》，8(4)，489-506。Barton, E. E.， & Wolery, M.(2010)。培训教师促进残疾幼儿的假装游戏。特殊儿童，77(1)，85-106。Saral, D, and Ulke-Kurkcuoglu, B.(2020)。用最少到最多的提示来增加自闭症儿童假装游戏的频率和多样性。幼儿特殊教育专题。推进网络出版。https://doi。Wetherby, A. M, Woods, J.， Allen, L.， Cleary, J.， Dickinson, H.， and Lord, C.(2004)。自闭症谱系障碍的早期指标在生命的第二年。孤独症与发育障碍杂志，34(5)，473-493。表1。象征性假装行为的例子
{"title":"School Breaks and Play","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/10483950221075404e","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10483950221075404e","url":null,"abstract":"Barton, E. E. (2015). Teaching generalized pretend play and related behaviors to young children with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 8(4), 489–506. Barton, E. E., & Wolery, M. (2010). Training teachers to promote pretend play in young children with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 77(1), 85–106. Saral, D., & Ulke-Kurkcuoglu, B. (2020). Using least-to-most prompting to increase the frequency and diversity of pretend play in children with autism. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education. Advance online publication. https://doi. org/10.1177/0271121420942850 Wetherby, A. M., Woods, J., Allen, L., Cleary, J., Dickinson, H., & Lord, C. (2004). Early indicators of autism spectrum disorders in the second year of life. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(5), 473–493. Table 1. Examples of Symbolic Pretend Behaviors","PeriodicalId":39491,"journal":{"name":"Word of Mouth","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41484523","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-22DOI: 10.1177/10483950221075404
C. Westby
Considerable research has highlighted that mind-reading abilities (theory of mind [ToM]) underpin particular aspects of children’s social functioning (Astington, 2003). Socially competent behaviors rely on the understanding of mental states. Children with more advanced ToM abilities show better social skills in the classroom and are less likely to receive negative behavioral evaluations from peers and aggressive evaluations from teachers (Belacchi & Farina, 2010; Diesendruck & Ben-Eliyahu, 2006). ToM is a powerful social tool that affects social relationships and fosters adjustment in everyday social contexts. Consequently, it might be believed that antisocial behavior reflects a weakness of social-cognitive skills. Although strong cognitive ToM skills are important for prosocial behavior, they do not guarantee it. Prosocial behavior requires both an understanding of and response to social cues that are influenced by cognitive ToM (awareness of thoughts), affective cognitive ToM (recognition of emotions), and affective empathy (the desire to respond to the emotions of others). Some children and adults consistently use their “mind-reading” skills for everyday antisocial purposes. Hence, the relationship between ToM and prosocial conduct is far from straightforward and simple. Just recognizing what other people need does not mean that a child will seek to meet those needs. Children may use their mind-reading abilities to manipulate, outwit, tease, or trick their peers (Astington, 2003). ToM skills may be helpful in concealing the antisocial child’s true intentions and goals by making the behavior appear inoffensive or at least ambiguous to others (Renouf et al., 2010). Thus, ToM can be used to engage both prosocial and antisocial or Machiavellian behaviors (Arefi, 2010). The expressions nice ToM and nasty ToM have been used to differentiate behaviors requiring prosocial use and antisocial use of ToM abilities, respectively (Ronald et al., 2005). Happé and Frith (1996) first proposed the expression theory of nasty minds to explain an intact but skewed A newsletter dedicated to speech & language in school-age children
相当多的研究强调读心术能力(心理理论[ToM])是儿童社会功能的特定方面的基础(Astington, 2003)。社会胜任行为依赖于对心理状态的理解。ToM能力越高级的儿童在课堂上表现出更好的社交技能，并且不太可能受到同伴的负面行为评价和老师的积极评价(Belacchi & Farina, 2010;Diesendruck & Ben-Eliyahu, 2006)。汤姆是一个强大的社会工具，影响社会关系和促进适应日常社会环境。因此，可以认为反社会行为反映了社会认知技能的弱点。虽然强大的认知ToM技能对亲社会行为很重要，但它们并不能保证它。亲社会行为需要理解和回应受认知汤姆(思想意识)、情感认知汤姆(情绪识别)和情感共情(对他人情绪做出反应的愿望)影响的社会线索。一些儿童和成人经常把他们的“读心术”用于日常的反社会目的。因此，ToM与亲社会行为之间的关系远不是直接和简单的。仅仅认识到别人的需要并不意味着孩子会寻求满足这些需要。孩子们可能会利用他们的读心术来操纵、智胜、戏弄或欺骗他们的同伴(Astington, 2003)。ToM技能可能有助于隐藏反社会儿童的真实意图和目标，使其行为看起来不冒犯他人或至少对他人模棱两可(Renouf et al.， 2010)。因此，ToM可用于参与亲社会和反社会或马基雅维利行为(Arefi, 2010)。“好汤姆”和“坏汤姆”这两个表达分别被用来区分需要亲社会使用和反社会使用汤姆能力的行为(Ronald et al.， 2005)。happ和Frith(1996)首先提出了“肮脏思想的表达理论”，以解释一份完整但有偏误的《A》通讯，专门研究学龄儿童的言语和语言
{"title":"Nice and Nasty ToM Behaviors","authors":"C. Westby","doi":"10.1177/10483950221075404","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10483950221075404","url":null,"abstract":"Considerable research has highlighted that mind-reading abilities (theory of mind [ToM]) underpin particular aspects of children’s social functioning (Astington, 2003). Socially competent behaviors rely on the understanding of mental states. Children with more advanced ToM abilities show better social skills in the classroom and are less likely to receive negative behavioral evaluations from peers and aggressive evaluations from teachers (Belacchi & Farina, 2010; Diesendruck & Ben-Eliyahu, 2006). ToM is a powerful social tool that affects social relationships and fosters adjustment in everyday social contexts. Consequently, it might be believed that antisocial behavior reflects a weakness of social-cognitive skills. Although strong cognitive ToM skills are important for prosocial behavior, they do not guarantee it. Prosocial behavior requires both an understanding of and response to social cues that are influenced by cognitive ToM (awareness of thoughts), affective cognitive ToM (recognition of emotions), and affective empathy (the desire to respond to the emotions of others). Some children and adults consistently use their “mind-reading” skills for everyday antisocial purposes. Hence, the relationship between ToM and prosocial conduct is far from straightforward and simple. Just recognizing what other people need does not mean that a child will seek to meet those needs. Children may use their mind-reading abilities to manipulate, outwit, tease, or trick their peers (Astington, 2003). ToM skills may be helpful in concealing the antisocial child’s true intentions and goals by making the behavior appear inoffensive or at least ambiguous to others (Renouf et al., 2010). Thus, ToM can be used to engage both prosocial and antisocial or Machiavellian behaviors (Arefi, 2010). The expressions nice ToM and nasty ToM have been used to differentiate behaviors requiring prosocial use and antisocial use of ToM abilities, respectively (Ronald et al., 2005). Happé and Frith (1996) first proposed the expression theory of nasty minds to explain an intact but skewed A newsletter dedicated to speech & language in school-age children","PeriodicalId":39491,"journal":{"name":"Word of Mouth","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46013331","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-22DOI: 10.1177/10483950221075404a
C. Westby
{"title":"Autobiographical Memory and Social Identity in Autism","authors":"C. Westby","doi":"10.1177/10483950221075404a","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10483950221075404a","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":39491,"journal":{"name":"Word of Mouth","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46493752","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-22DOI: 10.1177/10483950221075404b
C. Westby
Perner, J., & Ruffman, T. (1995). Episodic memory and autonoetic consciousness: Developmental evidence and a theory of childhood amnesia. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 59, 516–548. https://doi.org/10.1006/ jecp.1995.1024 Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W.G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Brooks/Cole. Terrett, G., Rendell, P. G., Raponi-Saunders, S., Henry, J. D., Bailey, P. E., & Altgassen, M. (2013). Episodic future thinking in children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43, 2558–2568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-013-1806-y Tulving, E. (1985). Memory and consciousness. Canadian Psychology, 26, 1–12. Turner, J. C., & Reynolds, K. J. (2011). Self-categorization theory. In P. A. M. Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology: Vol. 2 (pp. 399–417). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n46. Welch-Ross, M. K. (1997). Mother-child participation in conversation about the past: Relationships to preschoolers’ theory of mind. Developmental Psychology, 33, 618–629. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.33.4.618
{"title":"Comprehending Multiple Texts","authors":"C. Westby","doi":"10.1177/10483950221075404b","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10483950221075404b","url":null,"abstract":"Perner, J., & Ruffman, T. (1995). Episodic memory and autonoetic consciousness: Developmental evidence and a theory of childhood amnesia. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 59, 516–548. https://doi.org/10.1006/ jecp.1995.1024 Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W.G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Brooks/Cole. Terrett, G., Rendell, P. G., Raponi-Saunders, S., Henry, J. D., Bailey, P. E., & Altgassen, M. (2013). Episodic future thinking in children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43, 2558–2568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-013-1806-y Tulving, E. (1985). Memory and consciousness. Canadian Psychology, 26, 1–12. Turner, J. C., & Reynolds, K. J. (2011). Self-categorization theory. In P. A. M. Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology: Vol. 2 (pp. 399–417). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n46. Welch-Ross, M. K. (1997). Mother-child participation in conversation about the past: Relationships to preschoolers’ theory of mind. Developmental Psychology, 33, 618–629. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.33.4.618","PeriodicalId":39491,"journal":{"name":"Word of Mouth","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44079419","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-22DOI: 10.1177/10483950221075404d
C. Westby
Deficiencies in symbolic pretend play are early markers of ASD (Wetherby et al., 2004). Symbolic pretend play behaviors in children with ASD are usually limited, tend to be disconnected and different in form, and lack diversity when compared with the symbolic pretend play of children with typical development. Because symbolic pretend play is linked to language, cognitive, social-emotional, and self-regulation development, early childhood educators and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) often work to facilitate children’s development of these play skills. Developing these play skills is particularly difficult for children with ASD. Several single-subject design studies with small numbers of older preschool children with ASD have employed a least-to-most prompting (LTM) protocol to teach symbolic play. These studies have reported some degree of success in increasing the frequency and diversity in the play of the children with ASD (Barton, 2015; Barton & Wolery, 2010; Saral & Ulke-Kurkcuoglu, 2020). LTM consists of at least a three-level prompt hierarchy in which the least intrusive prompt is followed by more intrusive prompts. LTM might be particularly effective for teaching pretend play because it (a) lets the child respond independently, (b) minimizes the possibility of overreliance on prompts, (c) can be embedded into play contexts, and (d) supports an effective interaction between the child and their playmate. In the play sessions, the adults contingently imitated the child and applied a system of from least to most prompts. Saral and Ulke-Kurkcuoglu (2020) reported some success in the use of the LTM method to increase pretend play and symbolic behaviors in children with ASD. SLPs frequently use pretend play as an intervention context and goal. The LTM may be a useful therapeutic method for SLPs when working with children with ASD. Following is the LTM protocol used to promote four types of symbolic pretend play:
{"title":"Helping Children With Autism Engage in Symbolic Play","authors":"C. Westby","doi":"10.1177/10483950221075404d","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10483950221075404d","url":null,"abstract":"Deficiencies in symbolic pretend play are early markers of ASD (Wetherby et al., 2004). Symbolic pretend play behaviors in children with ASD are usually limited, tend to be disconnected and different in form, and lack diversity when compared with the symbolic pretend play of children with typical development. Because symbolic pretend play is linked to language, cognitive, social-emotional, and self-regulation development, early childhood educators and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) often work to facilitate children’s development of these play skills. Developing these play skills is particularly difficult for children with ASD. Several single-subject design studies with small numbers of older preschool children with ASD have employed a least-to-most prompting (LTM) protocol to teach symbolic play. These studies have reported some degree of success in increasing the frequency and diversity in the play of the children with ASD (Barton, 2015; Barton & Wolery, 2010; Saral & Ulke-Kurkcuoglu, 2020). LTM consists of at least a three-level prompt hierarchy in which the least intrusive prompt is followed by more intrusive prompts. LTM might be particularly effective for teaching pretend play because it (a) lets the child respond independently, (b) minimizes the possibility of overreliance on prompts, (c) can be embedded into play contexts, and (d) supports an effective interaction between the child and their playmate. In the play sessions, the adults contingently imitated the child and applied a system of from least to most prompts. Saral and Ulke-Kurkcuoglu (2020) reported some success in the use of the LTM method to increase pretend play and symbolic behaviors in children with ASD. SLPs frequently use pretend play as an intervention context and goal. The LTM may be a useful therapeutic method for SLPs when working with children with ASD. Following is the LTM protocol used to promote four types of symbolic pretend play:","PeriodicalId":39491,"journal":{"name":"Word of Mouth","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46771568","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-22DOI: 10.1177/10483950211059898
C. Westby
As of 2016, 1 in 54 children had a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). With the increase in the number of children diagnosed with ASD, there has been a precipitous increase in both the quantity and quality of research examining interventions for young children with ASD. From 2011 to 2018, the reported number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of interventions for young children with autism increased from 2 to 48. To summarize this transforming evidence base, Sandbank and colleagues reviewed and meta-analyzed 150 reports of 130 studies, 87 of which were RCTs, which collectively reported effect sizes for 1,615 outcomes, representing 6,240 young children with autism. Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) are to employ evidence-based intervention. Frequently, SLPs have been told that only programs based on applied behavioral analysis or discrete trial teaching have evidence. In their meta-analysis, Sandbank and colleagues have documented that this is not the case.
{"title":"Meta-Analysis of Autism Interventions","authors":"C. Westby","doi":"10.1177/10483950211059898","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10483950211059898","url":null,"abstract":"As of 2016, 1 in 54 children had a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). With the increase in the number of children diagnosed with ASD, there has been a precipitous increase in both the quantity and quality of research examining interventions for young children with ASD. From 2011 to 2018, the reported number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of interventions for young children with autism increased from 2 to 48. To summarize this transforming evidence base, Sandbank and colleagues reviewed and meta-analyzed 150 reports of 130 studies, 87 of which were RCTs, which collectively reported effect sizes for 1,615 outcomes, representing 6,240 young children with autism. Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) are to employ evidence-based intervention. Frequently, SLPs have been told that only programs based on applied behavioral analysis or discrete trial teaching have evidence. In their meta-analysis, Sandbank and colleagues have documented that this is not the case.","PeriodicalId":39491,"journal":{"name":"Word of Mouth","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41684625","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-22DOI: 10.1177/10483950211059898a
C. Westby
for children with disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 37, 64–80. Ben-Sasson, A., Hen, L., Fluss, R., Cermak, S. A., Engel-Yeger, B., & Gal, E. (2009). A meta-analysis of sensory modulation symptoms in individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 39(1), 1–11. Carter, A. S., Messinger, D. S., Stone, W. L., Celimli, S., Nahmias, A. S., & Yoder, P. (2011). A randomized controlled trial of Hanen’s “more than words” in toddlers with early autism symptoms. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 52, 741–752. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2011.02395.x Cascio, C. J., Woynaroski, T., Baranek, G. T., & Wallace, M. T. (2016). Toward an interdisciplinary approach to understanding sensory function in autism spectrum disorder. Autism Research, 9, 920–925. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aur.1612 Case-Smith, J., & Arbesman, M. (2008). Evidence-based review of interventions for autism used in or of relevance to occupational therapy. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62, 416–429. Case-Smith, J., Weaver, L., & Fristad, M. A. (2015). A systematic review of sensory processing interventions for children with autism spectrum disorders. Autism, 19(2), 133–148. doi:10.1177/1362361313517762 Corbett, B. A., Schupp, C. W., Levine, S., & Mendoza, S. (2009). Comparing cortisol, stress, and sensory sensitivity in children with autism. Autism Research, 2, 39–49. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1002/aur.64 Ferster, C. B., & Demyer, M. K. (1962). A method for the experimental analysis of the behavior of autistic children. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 32, 89–98. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1962.tb00267.x Goin-Kochel, R. P., Mackintosh, V. H., & Myers, B. J. (2009). Parental reports on the efficacy of treatments and therapies for their children with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 3, 528–537. Green, J., Charman, T., McConachie, H., Aldred, C., Slonims, V., Howlin, P., . . . Pickles, A. (2010). Parent-mediated communication-focused treatment in children with autism (PACT): A randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 375, 2152– 2160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S01406736(10)60587-9 Greenspan, S. I., & Wieder, S. (2007). The developmental individual difference, relationship-based (DIR/Floortime) model approach to autism spectrum disorders. In E. Hollander & E. Anagnostou (Eds.), Clinical manual for the treatment of autism (pp. 179–209). American Psychiatric Publishing. Kaiser, A. P. (1993). Parent-implemented language intervention: An environmental system perspective. In A. P. Kaiser & D. B. Gray (Eds.), Enhancing children’s communication: Research foundations for intervention (Vol. 2, pp. 63–84). Paul H. Brookes. Kasari, C., Freeman, S., & Paparella, T. (2006). Joint attention and symbolic play in young children with autism: A randomized controlled intervention study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47, 611–620. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1469-7610.2005.
{"title":"Assessing Language Samples","authors":"C. Westby","doi":"10.1177/10483950211059898a","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10483950211059898a","url":null,"abstract":"for children with disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 37, 64–80. Ben-Sasson, A., Hen, L., Fluss, R., Cermak, S. A., Engel-Yeger, B., & Gal, E. (2009). A meta-analysis of sensory modulation symptoms in individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 39(1), 1–11. Carter, A. S., Messinger, D. S., Stone, W. L., Celimli, S., Nahmias, A. S., & Yoder, P. (2011). A randomized controlled trial of Hanen’s “more than words” in toddlers with early autism symptoms. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 52, 741–752. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2011.02395.x Cascio, C. J., Woynaroski, T., Baranek, G. T., & Wallace, M. T. (2016). Toward an interdisciplinary approach to understanding sensory function in autism spectrum disorder. Autism Research, 9, 920–925. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aur.1612 Case-Smith, J., & Arbesman, M. (2008). Evidence-based review of interventions for autism used in or of relevance to occupational therapy. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62, 416–429. Case-Smith, J., Weaver, L., & Fristad, M. A. (2015). A systematic review of sensory processing interventions for children with autism spectrum disorders. Autism, 19(2), 133–148. doi:10.1177/1362361313517762 Corbett, B. A., Schupp, C. W., Levine, S., & Mendoza, S. (2009). Comparing cortisol, stress, and sensory sensitivity in children with autism. Autism Research, 2, 39–49. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1002/aur.64 Ferster, C. B., & Demyer, M. K. (1962). A method for the experimental analysis of the behavior of autistic children. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 32, 89–98. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1962.tb00267.x Goin-Kochel, R. P., Mackintosh, V. H., & Myers, B. J. (2009). Parental reports on the efficacy of treatments and therapies for their children with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 3, 528–537. Green, J., Charman, T., McConachie, H., Aldred, C., Slonims, V., Howlin, P., . . . Pickles, A. (2010). Parent-mediated communication-focused treatment in children with autism (PACT): A randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 375, 2152– 2160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S01406736(10)60587-9 Greenspan, S. I., & Wieder, S. (2007). The developmental individual difference, relationship-based (DIR/Floortime) model approach to autism spectrum disorders. In E. Hollander & E. Anagnostou (Eds.), Clinical manual for the treatment of autism (pp. 179–209). American Psychiatric Publishing. Kaiser, A. P. (1993). Parent-implemented language intervention: An environmental system perspective. In A. P. Kaiser & D. B. Gray (Eds.), Enhancing children’s communication: Research foundations for intervention (Vol. 2, pp. 63–84). Paul H. Brookes. Kasari, C., Freeman, S., & Paparella, T. (2006). Joint attention and symbolic play in young children with autism: A randomized controlled intervention study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47, 611–620. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1469-7610.2005.","PeriodicalId":39491,"journal":{"name":"Word of Mouth","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42190668","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-22DOI: 10.1177/10483950211059898c
C. Westby
For TD adolescents, a significant relationship was found between semantic personality traits and episodic AMs, introspection, and mentalizing abilities. For adolescents with ASD, this relationship was not observed. This supports the idea that different aspects of AM and the self may dissociate during development. Individuals with ASD perceived themselves as knowing significantly less about other people’s internal mental states than did TD young people. Somewhat unexpected, however, was the finding that adolescents with ASD perceived someone close to them (typically a family member) as knowing more about their own (ASD participants’) behaviors than themselves, which was in contrast to the comparison group. These findings indicate a distinction between the representation of internal and external personality traits for young people with ASD, such that they perceive themselves as knowing less about their own behaviors than someone close to them. During typical development, a distinction has been proposed between the objective evaluation of behaviors and subjective measurement of mental states, with the former requiring comparative judgments and the latter requiring qualitative judgments. This suggests that for young people with ASD, introspection abilities may vary as a function of objective or subjective evaluation processes. Perceived knowledge of physical (behavioral) aspects of the self may be more impaired than perceived knowledge of psychological (mental state) aspects of the self due to reduced confidence and/ or competence in making comparative judgments about themselves relative to others. Exploring subjective and objective evaluation processes using experimental paradigms for young people with ASD would be of relevance to these discussions. These study findings suggest that although adolescents with ASD are able to reflect and use their own experiences to inform their understanding of themselves and other people, the way in which they derive knowledge about themselves is atypical. Because there is a bidirectional relationship between AM and the self, the authors speculate that difficulties with introspection may also contribute to the atypical specification of AMs and poorer use of the self as an effective memory organizational principle. These difficulties may affect the social and directive functions of AM and may contribute to the problems persons with ASD have in forming social relationships and using past experiences to guide future behaviors and manage change.
{"title":"Sampling Utterances and Grammatical Analysis Revised (SUGAR)","authors":"C. Westby","doi":"10.1177/10483950211059898c","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10483950211059898c","url":null,"abstract":"For TD adolescents, a significant relationship was found between semantic personality traits and episodic AMs, introspection, and mentalizing abilities. For adolescents with ASD, this relationship was not observed. This supports the idea that different aspects of AM and the self may dissociate during development. Individuals with ASD perceived themselves as knowing significantly less about other people’s internal mental states than did TD young people. Somewhat unexpected, however, was the finding that adolescents with ASD perceived someone close to them (typically a family member) as knowing more about their own (ASD participants’) behaviors than themselves, which was in contrast to the comparison group. These findings indicate a distinction between the representation of internal and external personality traits for young people with ASD, such that they perceive themselves as knowing less about their own behaviors than someone close to them. During typical development, a distinction has been proposed between the objective evaluation of behaviors and subjective measurement of mental states, with the former requiring comparative judgments and the latter requiring qualitative judgments. This suggests that for young people with ASD, introspection abilities may vary as a function of objective or subjective evaluation processes. Perceived knowledge of physical (behavioral) aspects of the self may be more impaired than perceived knowledge of psychological (mental state) aspects of the self due to reduced confidence and/ or competence in making comparative judgments about themselves relative to others. Exploring subjective and objective evaluation processes using experimental paradigms for young people with ASD would be of relevance to these discussions. These study findings suggest that although adolescents with ASD are able to reflect and use their own experiences to inform their understanding of themselves and other people, the way in which they derive knowledge about themselves is atypical. Because there is a bidirectional relationship between AM and the self, the authors speculate that difficulties with introspection may also contribute to the atypical specification of AMs and poorer use of the self as an effective memory organizational principle. These difficulties may affect the social and directive functions of AM and may contribute to the problems persons with ASD have in forming social relationships and using past experiences to guide future behaviors and manage change.","PeriodicalId":39491,"journal":{"name":"Word of Mouth","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47732389","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-22DOI: 10.1177/10483950211059898b
C. Westby
Pavelko, S. L., Owens, R. E., Ireland, M., & Hahs-Vaughn, D. L. (2016). Use of language sample analysis by school-based SLPs: Results of a nationwide survey. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 47, 246–258. Rice, M., Redmond, S., & Hoffman, L. (2006). Mean length of utterance in children with specific language impairment and in younger control children shows concurrent validity and stable and parallel growth trajectories. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 793–808. Rice, M., Smolik, F., Perpich, D., Thompson, T., Rytting, N., & Blossom, M. (2010). Mean length of utterance levels in 6-month intervals for children 3 to 9 years with and without language impairments. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53, 333–349.
{"title":"Personality Traits and Autobiographical Memory","authors":"C. Westby","doi":"10.1177/10483950211059898b","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10483950211059898b","url":null,"abstract":"Pavelko, S. L., Owens, R. E., Ireland, M., & Hahs-Vaughn, D. L. (2016). Use of language sample analysis by school-based SLPs: Results of a nationwide survey. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 47, 246–258. Rice, M., Redmond, S., & Hoffman, L. (2006). Mean length of utterance in children with specific language impairment and in younger control children shows concurrent validity and stable and parallel growth trajectories. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 793–808. Rice, M., Smolik, F., Perpich, D., Thompson, T., Rytting, N., & Blossom, M. (2010). Mean length of utterance levels in 6-month intervals for children 3 to 9 years with and without language impairments. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53, 333–349.","PeriodicalId":39491,"journal":{"name":"Word of Mouth","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44209720","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：