Descriptive Assessment of Social Skills for Young Children with Autism Jennifer M. Asmus, Ph.D. Maureen A. Conroy, Ph.D. Crystal N. Ladwig, Ph.D. Jennifer A. Sellers, M.Ed. Brian A. Boyd, M.Ed. University of Florida Supported by U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (#H324D020023) Panhandle Autism Society

Presentation Outline Review of relevant literature Overview of research project Details of descriptive assessment component –Forms are under development and have not been validated for use –Please do not distribute Practice with 2 descriptive instruments –Snapshot assessment –Social skills observation screening Summary Questions

Rationale for the Study of Social Skills in Young Children Increase in the prevalence of children identified as having Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) Many children identified with ASD at age 2 to 3 Experience difficulty in the areas of –Language –Behavior –Social interaction skills Children with ASD often have difficulty socially interacting with their peers Lack of social interaction skills and problem behavior often interfere with successful inclusion in early childhood programs –Placement in inclusive setting alone will not produce positive and lasting changes in social skills (Koegel et al., 2001; Strain & Hoyson, 2000)

Social Skills Intervention Research Target specific social behaviors such as initiation and response (Matson et al., 1996; Rogers, 2000) Child with ASD targeted interventions –Teach child imitative behaviors –Play initiation strategies –Use of photographic activity schedules –Majority conducted in inclusive settings –Outcomes Effective way to increase social interactions Use of imitation alone poor outcome (did not teach specific social skill)

Social Skills Intervention Research Continued Peer targeted interventions –Awareness activities paired with extrinsic reinforcement for interacting with child with ASD –Focus on increasing peers’ initiations or responsiveness to child with ASD –Majority of research done in inclusive settings –Outcomes More effect on the responsive behavior of children with ASD Less of an impact to influence initiations of children with ASD

Social Skills Intervention Research Continued Teacher Targeted Interventions –One study identified the teacher as intervention agent (Kohler et al., 2001) –Inclusive preschool settings evaluated –Taught teachers to use naturalistic teaching strategies to improve social interaction of 4 preschoolers with ASD Stimulate child’s interest & play with activity Facilitate communication and social interaction with others –Outcomes Significant improvements seen for 2/4 children Teachers did not like the naturalistic strategies

Social Skills Intervention Research Continued Parent targeted interventions –One study identified parent as intervention agent (Kaiser et al., 2000) –Three components to intervention Environmental arrangement of materials to promote child engagement Responsive interaction techniques to build social skills Procedures to prompt, model, consequate use of new language forms Conducted in clinic setting for 6 parents, generalized to home –Outcomes All 6 parents used strategies appropriately 5/6 maintained and used 6 months later All children maintained increases in social language

Summary of Intervention Literature Interventions that directly target child with ASD most effective –Increases social interaction skills, initiations –Generalization of skills to other people, settings, and activities –Facilitates language and social skills development –Child with ASD must be taught direct and specific social skills interventions not just be “physically” included with typical peers Majority of literature on social skills for children with ASD has emphasized interventions not necessarily tied to experimental assessment findings Therefore, our understanding of why social skills difficulties occur has not been advanced

Assessment of Social Skills Deficits Typical assessment examines pivotal or appropriate skill targets (Peck et al., 1997) Very limited literature on systematic assessment of social skills deficits prior to implementation of an intervention Need to examine events related to occurrence of both appropriate and inappropriate social skills behaviors Use that information to match interventions to address individual needs based on findings of experimental analyses Use of applied behavior analysis (ABA) literature for guidance

Assessment of Social Skills Continued Very limited research on use of experimental analyses of social skills deficits –Peck & colleagues conducted structural analysis (SA) to assess appropriate social skills behaviors –Effective intervention identified, implemented, and generalized More research needed on use of experimental analysis to identify factors that serve to facilitate and/or maintain appropriate and inappropriate social skill behaviors for young children with ASD in natural settings

Research Project Purpose To increase knowledge and understanding of the usefulness of experimental analysis techniques for evaluating social skills behaviors of young children with ASD in natural settings To utilize descriptive and experimental evaluation information to develop interventions to decrease inappropriate and increase appropriate social skill behaviors To facilitate the success of young children with ASD in general education classrooms

Project Specifics Participants: 18 children over a 3 year period –Project began January 2003 –Current participants - 7 Ages: 18 months to 5 years of age Diagnoses: Autism Spectrum Setting: Natural setting (home, childcare, school setting) Behaviors: Social skills difficulties (withdrawal, inappropriate or limited play with peers) Assessment & Intervention: Multi-phase process to link assessment to intervention

Method Descriptive Assessments –Social Skills Interview Form with primary caregiver(s) –Project DATA Social Skills Assessment (Schwartz, 2002) –Snap Shot Assessment (adapted from Conroy & Brown, 2001) 6 observations conducted during opportunities for socially interact –Social skills observation screening (adapted from Brown Odom, & Buysee, 2000) 10-min observations of child with ASD in different social contexts (manipulative area, art, pretend play area) Descriptive Observations of Contextual Factors –10 hours of direct, sequential recording of behaviors and contextual factors in natural setting –Observation of the interaction of peer and target child behaviors in presence/absence of different contexts including: activity type, play format, and level of adult engagement –Outcomes of social interactions

Methods (Continued) Experimental Analyses –Functional analyses (Iwata et al., 1982/1994) Conditions: ignore, tangible, attention, escape, free play –Structural analyses (Cooper et al., 1990; Peck et al., 1997) Conditions: amount of peer or adult attention,preference for social activity/materials, type of directions Interventions –Replacement of inappropriate social behaviors with development of appropriate social behaviors –Utilization of contextual factors that reduce the likelihood of inappropriate social behaviors and increase likelihood of appropriate social behaviors.

Garrett 5 years old Diagnosis –Autism Kindergarten: Included 80% of the day –IQ 55 with Developmental Abilities Scale (DAS) –Average academics (below average math) –Communicates with simple sentences –Classroom aide part-time basis Behaviors of concern –Social withdrawal Very limited interactions with peers –Disruption (loud vocalizations) –Stereotypy (repetitive use of phrases)

Indirect Assessment Information Strengths –Communication - speaks in 3-4 word sentences –Learns and follows established routines –Tolerates being in proximity to peers –No inappropriate externalizing behaviors (no more aggression) –Appears to enjoy praise from teacher and aide –Music activities identified by teacher and aide as possibilities for increasing likelihood that Garrett will socially interact with peers –Observes play of others –Remains with group during activities Needs –Does not initiate toward peers –Typically chooses solitary activities (books) –Few activities/materials appear to stimulate social interaction –Avoids peer initiations by turning or walking away –Limited appropriate social behaviors

Summary of Indirect Information for Garrett Appropriate social interaction skills limited –Often physically turns away in response to peers initiations –Few if any activities known to increase likelihood that he will interact –Identified factors that decrease likelihood Noise, too many people –Perception that Garrett uses appropriate social behaviors currently to seek information –Perception that inappropriate social behaviors are used to avoid others and decrease stimulation from environment

Snap Shot Assessment Developed to allow practitioners to observe and gather information on child’s social strengths and needs Purpose: –Examine variables that surround occurrence of social behaviors –Identify the outcomes of social behaviors when they do occur Identify 3-5 activities when target child is most social or has most opportunities for social interaction with peers Observe child for 6 observation intervals across the 3-5 activities

Definitions Identify when child with ASD and peers: –Social initiation Behavior directed toward a peer in an attempt to elicit a social response, peer attention, or access objects/activities –Respond to social initiation Behavior that the child engages in to overtly acknowledge an initiation (e.g., a target child asks a peer to play and the peer joins him in play) –No response Child ignores the initiator, and/or continues to engage in the same play behavior –Interaction Sequence of 3 social behaviors between a target child and peer (initiation-response-interaction). The interaction begins with the third behavior in the sequence

Snap Shot Assessment Specifics Type & Form of Behavior Context & Appropriate- ness of Behavior Reciprocity of Exchange Perceived Goal of Behavior Actual Outcome

Snap Shot Definitions Type and form of behavior –Describe behavior observed for child with ASD (target child) –Describe what behavior looked like (repeated phrase) –Describe situation in which behavior occurred (swinging outside) –If teacher prompted social behavior note this as well Context & appropriateness of play –State what play activity was (blocks, swing) –State if target child’s behavior was appropriate (both socially and developmentally) Reciprocity of exchange –State whether target child’s behavior was reciprocated (did peer respond?; did exchange lead to interaction) Perceived goal of behavior –Describe goal you perceive the target child wanted (e.g., escape social situation, obtain tangible item, obtain peer attention) Actual outcome –State whether perceived goal/outcome was successful or unsuccessful –Describe what occurred (peer walked away, unsuccessful)

Snap Shot Findings for Garrett 5 observations (28 total) 3 to 5 of those minutes (total of 12 minutes) each time did not include any social behavior Initiations - Garrett initiated 4/28 times –2 help/comfort (building, bumped child on swing) –2 requests (access to swing, teacher-prompted) –Peers initiated to Garrett 4/28 times Requests for Garrett to comply with specific request (3) or engage in play behavior When Garrett did initiate peers responded only 1 time/4 –When peers initiated to Garrett he never responded Outcome - unsuccessful to obtain peer attention –Successful to obtain access to tangible (swing)

Snap Shot Examples for Garrett Outdoor play –Garrett initiated by saying “hey” repeatedly to peer on swing; peer did not respond; Garrett was trying to get a turn on the swing; teacher gave him her swing; unsuccessful with peer, successful to get tangible item –Garrett initiated by saying “Uh oh!” repeatedly after peer was hit by swing he was on; no peer response (walked away); appeared Garrett wanted peers attention; unsuccessful Sensory (Play-doh) activity –Garrett pointed to peer and made a comment (difficult to interpret what he said) after she made a noise; peer did not respond; unsuccessful outcome Block area and cognitive activity –Peer building with blocks and initiated by asking Garrett to move; Garrett did not respond (continued reading chart on wall with aide) - same situation occurred 3 times, each time, no response from Garrett

Summary of Snap Shot for Garrett Summary –When Garrett initiates peers do not respond –When peers initiate Garrett does not respond –Garrett’s initiations were perseverative and appear to perhaps occur when he desires a tangible item –Garrett has limited social interactions

Snap Shot Practice #1

Snap Shot Practice #2

Snap Shot Practice #3

Snap Shot Practice #4

Snap Shot Practice #5

Snap Shot Practice #6

Snap Shot Practice #7

Snap Shot Practice #8

Snap Shot Practice #9

Snap Shot Practice #10

Snap Shot Practice #11

Snap Shot Practice #12

Snap Shot Practice #13

Snap Shot Practice #14

Snap Shot Practice #15

Snap Shot Practice #16

Snap Shot Summary Snap shot is a descriptive observation instrument that can be used to identify –Variables when social behaviors occur Did target child initiate? When peer initiates what is target child’s response? What is the context of social situation –Outcomes of social situations What was the perceived goal of target child’s behavior and was that achieved Utilize this information when developing experimental analyses

Social Skills Observation Screening Developed to allow practitioners to observe and gather information on child’s social strengths and needs in a more structured way than snap shot Purpose –Measure rate/frequency of social behaviors –Measure topography of social behaviors

Social Skills Observation Screening Continued Identify 2-3 times/activities when there will be a high likelihood that the target child will be interacting with peers Observe each time/activity period at least 2–3 times. Each observation should be 10 minutes long using partial interval recording (observe 10 seconds, record for 5 seconds) Record anecdotal information regarding social interaction in comments section (e.g., favorite peers, materials, activities, physiological setting events) Summarize data by graphing the % of intervals the participant engaged in social behavior across activities and within each activity

Screening Definitions I = Target child initiation R = Target child response SI = Target child initiated social interaction PI = Peer social initiation PR = Peer social response SIP = Peer initiated social interaction KCircle code if target child is appropriate KUnderline code if target child is inappropriate KSlash code if teacher prompted KX over code if continued interaction from previous interval

Screening Example Time I R SI PI PR SIP I R SI PI PR SIP I R SI PI PR SIP I R SI PI PR SIP I R SI PI PR SIP I R SI PI PR SIP 2I R SI PI PR SIP I R SI PI PR SIP I R SI PI PR SIP I R SI PI PR SIP I R SI PI PR SIP I R SI PI PR SIP

Screening Practice #1

Screening Practice #2

Screening Practice #3

Screening Practice #4

Screening Practice #5

Screening Practice #6

Screening Practice #7

Screening Practice #8

Social Skills Observation Screening Summary Screening is a descriptive observation instrument that can be used to identify –Frequency or rate at which social behaviors occur over a 10 minute time period Summarize initiations, responses, interactions Identify if there are activities that increase or decrease likelihood of social behaviors Utilize this information when developing experimental analyses

Next Steps 10 hours of direct observation across a set of 9 specific activity types –Determine target child and peer social behaviors in relation to activity types, and level of adult engagement Consider all information in the development of experimental analyses Match outcomes of experimental analyses to select target behaviors and intervention strategy for treatment Train all care providers in use of treatment strategies Follow-up for 1-2 years

Findings from DO for Garrett Kindergarten with 20 students, 1 aide –Data collected across a 5 week period –Overall rate of Garrett’s initiations.01/min Equals about 1 initiation every 2 hours Most often occurred during art, computer, games with rules –Overall rate of Garrett’s responses.075/min Equals about 4.5 times per hour Most often occurred during computer and games with rules More likely to respond (and last longer) if child initiated play and adult was disengaged from situation –Perceived outcome of social behaviors was to obtain tangible/peer attention –When not engaging in social behavior 8% of time engaged in stereotypy, 92% engaged in solitary play

Summary Social skills literature focused on specific intervention strategies not on methods to systematically assess the reasons or functions of those skill difficulties Need to develop instruments that will provide information for experimental analyses of social skills behaviors Snap shot and screening provide researcher or practitioner low tech method to obtain information about child’s social behaviors (or lack of behaviors) This information can be used to develop the experimental conditions of FA and SA All of this information will lead to the development of more effective and efficient interventions for young children with ASD to increase opportunities for meaningful inclusion

QUESTIONS?