Comparison of most-to-least to error correction to teach tacting to two children diagnosed with autism

This study compared most-to-least prompting to an error correction procedure involving feedback and remedial trials for teaching two children with autism a variety of expressive labels. Using an adapted alternating treatment design nested into a multiple probe design, experimenters taught each participant how to expressively label different pictures of cartoon characters or comic book characters. Results indicated that, while both procedures were effective, participants learned more skills with the error correction procedure, and the error correction procedure was more efficient than most-to-least prompting.