Help with 401 article activity review #3

BRIEF REPORT

Brief Report: Use of Superheroes Social Skills to Promote Accurate Social Skill Use in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Keith C. Radley2 • W. Blake Ford1 • Melissa B. McHugh1 • Komila Dadakhodjaeva1 •

Roderick D. O’Handley1 • Allison A. Battaglia1 • John D. K. Lum1

Published online: 5 April 2015

� Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Abstract The current study evaluated the use of Super-

heroes Social Skills to promote accurate use of discrete

social skills in training and generalization conditions in two

children with autism spectrum disorder. Participants at-

tended a twice weekly social skills training group over

5 weeks, with lessons targeting nonverbal, requesting, re-

sponding, and conversation skills. A multiple probe across

social skills design, replicated across participants, was

utilized to assess the effects of participation of the inter-

vention on skill accuracy. Following introduction of the

intervention, participants demonstrated abrupt improve-

ments in skill accuracy in both training and generalization

conditions. Additionally, parental reports of participant

social functioning indicated improvements following par-

ticipation in the intervention. Limitations and future di-

rections are discussed.

Keywords Social skills training � Video modeling � Self-monitoring � Superheroes Social Skills

Introduction

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is characterized by im-

pairments in social communication, and restricted repeti-

tive behaviors and interests (American Psychiatric

Association 2013). Impairments in social skill development

result in poor outcomes in children and adults with ASD,

such as poor academic achievement, isolation, mental

health problems, and unemployment (e.g., Bauminger et al.

2003; Howlin et al. 2000; Strain and Schwartz 2001). In

order to improve outcomes for individuals with ASD, so-

cial skills training programs are frequently implemented

with children with ASD (e.g., Goin-Kochel et al. 2007).

Although many training programs successfully promote

discrete social skill acquisition (e.g., Doggett et al. 2013),

research suggests social skills training is often ineffective

in promoting use of target social skills in generalized

contexts (Bellini et al. 2007; Rao et al. 2008).

Superheroes Social Skills (Jenson et al. 2011) is a social

intervention that trains for generalization through incor-

poration of generalization technologies described by

Stokes and Osnes (1989). In an examination of the inter-

vention, Radley et al. (2014b) evaluated the effect of par-

ticipation in the Superheroes Social Skills program on

accurate demonstration of discrete social skills in a training

and a generalization setting with three children with ASD.

Probes of accuracy in the training setting indicated im-

mediate increases in level and trend of skill accuracy for all

participants and skills. Generalization probes were also

conducted, in which novel researchers presented novel cues

for skill use and provided performance feedback following

inaccurate demonstration of the target social skills. Gen-

eralization data also indicated immediate increases in level

and trend of skill accuracy across all participants and skills.

Probes of skill maintenance indicated that skills were

maintained at levels similar to intervention.

Although results of Radley et al. (2014b) indicated im-

provements in discrete skill accuracy in both training and

generalization probes, probes of generalization were dis-

similar to real-world social skill use, as generalization was

assessed by researchers who provided performance

& Keith C. Radley

[email protected]

1 University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS, USA

2 Department of Psychology, University of Southern

Mississippi, 118 College Drive # 5025, Hattiesburg,

MS 39406-001, USA

123

J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:3048–3054

DOI 10.1007/s10803-015-2442-5

feedback. The purpose of the present study was to replicate

findings and address limitations of Radley et al. by

evaluating the effect of participation in the intervention on

skill accuracy within a training setting, and generalization

of accurate skill use to communication partners with whom

patterns of communication were previously established

who did not provide performance feedback.

Methods

Participants and Setting

This study was approved by the affiliate university’s In-

stitutional Review Board. Participants included two chil-

dren with diagnoses of ASD. At the time of the study,

Taylor, an 11-year-old male, had diagnoses of ASD and

ADHD from a licensed psychologist. A review of records

revealed that Taylor obtained a full scale IQ of 110 on the

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fourth Edition

(Wechsler 2003). On the Kaufman Test of Educational

Achievement-Second Edition (Kaufman and Kaufman

2004), he obtained standard scores of 117 on Reading and

120 on Math. A parent-completed Asperger Syndrome

Diagnostic Scale (Myles et al. 2001) revealed an Asperger

Syndrome Quotient of 115, suggesting a high probability of

Asperger’s Syndrome. Results from an occupational ther-

apy evaluation revealed average to above average scores in

visual motor integration and visual perception, while a

speech-language evaluation revealed oral language skills in

the average range. At the time of the study, Taylor received

special education and gifted services at school, and had

previously received clinic-based services for disruptive

home behavior and impulse control. At the time of the

study, Robby, a 12-year-old male, had diagnoses of ASD

and moderate intellectual disability from a licensed psy-

chologist. A review of records revealed that Robby ob-

tained a full scale IQ of 60 on the Stanford Binet-Fifth

Edition (Roid 2003). On the Wechsler Individual

Achievement Test-Third Edition (Wechsler 2009), Robby

obtained a Total Achievement standard score of 61. A

parent completed Gilliam Autism Rating Scale-Second

Edition (Gilliam 2006) revealed an overall Autism Index

score of 124, suggesting a high probability of Autism.

Additionally, Robby received a Global Adaptive Com-

posite of 48 on a parent-completed Adaptive Behavior

Assessment System-Second Edition (Harrison and Oakland

2003). He received special education services at school,

and had previously received clinic-based services for dis-

ruptive home behaviors and daily living skills training.

Social skills training took place in a university-based

clinic in the southeastern United States. Both participants

were referred to the clinic for social skills training. All

social skills training and probes of skill accuracy were

conducted in a clinic-based conference room. A table and

chairs were placed at the center of the room, parallel to a

television that was used to display instructional videos.

Generalization of skill acquisition was measured across

persons and settings in the clinic hallway, a clinic treatment

room, and in a clinician’s office.

Dependent Measures

Probes of Skill Accuracy

Skill accuracy in the training setting was the primary de-

pendent variable in the present study. During each probe of

skill accuracy, a trained graduate student engaged the

participant with a cue for a specific target social skill (e.g.,

‘‘Taylor, what did you do at school today?’’) while another

trained graduate student coded accurate demonstration of

skill steps. The skill steps were coded using task analyses

of target skills derived from the Superheroes Social Skills

manual (Table 1), and the percentage of correctly demon-

strated skill steps was calculated. During the intervention

phase, two probes were typically delivered per participant

per social skills training session, with one additional probe

being delivered as necessary to demonstrate data stability.

Generalized skill accuracy was assessed across settings

and individuals. Probes of generalized skill accuracy were

delivered by non-researcher communication partners,

consisting of parents and clinic personnel (e.g., adminis-

trative assistant) with whom the participant typically in-

teracted upon entering the clinic. Generalization probes

took place in a clinic waiting room or adjoining hallway

using novel cues for skill use (e.g., ‘‘Robby, what is your

favorite movie?). During generalized skill probes, the

communication partner delivered a cue for target skill use

while a trained graduate student coded for accurate

demonstration of skill steps.

Social Functioning

Prior to and immediately following intervention, parents

of participants completed the Autism Social Skills Profile

(ASSP; Bellini and Hopf 2007). The ASSP consists of 49

4-point Likert items and results in a Total Social Func-

tioning score comprised of three sub-scores: Social

Reciprocity; Detrimental Social Behaviors; and Par-

ticipation/Avoidance. Previous evaluations of the ASSP

have found the measure to have high internal consistency

(a = 0.94) and test–retest reliability of 0.90 (Bellini and

Hopf).

J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:3048–3054 3049

123

Procedures

Design

A multiple probe across skills design with concurrent

replication across participants (Gast 2010) was used. Phase

changes were made once both participants reached mastery

of the target skill in intervention, indicated by three con-

secutive probes of 100 % accuracy in the training setting.

Baseline

Prior to collection of baseline data, parents completed the

ASSP independently. Analysis of parent-completed ASSPs

indicated salient deficits in eye contact, asking questions,

maintaining give and take of conversations, talking about

interests of others, and requesting assistance. Salient defi-

cits identified by parents of both participants were then

matched with social skills included in the Superheroes

Social Skills program. A total of four skills from the Su-

perheroes Social Skills program were selected to be taught

due to correspondence with parent-identified deficits on the

ASSP: Body Basics (nonverbal skills), Expressing Wants

and Needs, Responding to Questions and Requests, and

Conversation Maintenance. Following identification of

skills to be taught, baseline skill accuracy probes were

conducted in both the training and generalization settings

using task analyses of skills to be targeted using the Su-

perheroes Social Skills program. Participants were not

provided with praise or performance feedback during

baseline. Phase change from baseline to intervention was

made contingent upon both participant’s data trend and

variability.

Intervention

Skills were trained and probed during 1.5 h sessions over

5 weeks, with intervention sessions occurring twice

weekly. Social skills training was presented in a group

format, such that both participants received simultaneous

training in the same target skill.

During the first lesson of each week, participants re-

ceived didactic instruction in the target skill steps by

animated superheroes via DVD. Animated didactic in-

struction consisted of an animator’s hand holding a marker

while rapidly drawing superhero characters, with voiceover

narration and text providing rationale for and instruction in

target skill use (Fig. 1). The participants then viewed two

to three video models of unknown, similarly-aged peers

performing the target skill in multiple contexts. Video

models contained voiceover narration and text providing

instruction for use of the skill (Fig. 1). Following, the fa-

cilitators reviewed skill steps and modeled correct and in-

correct skill usage, encouraging participants to identify

mistakes or omissions in skill steps when target skills were

incorrectly modeled. Participants were then provided with

self-monitoring cards to be marked contingent upon correct

demonstration of the target skill steps. Next, participants

role-played the skills with each other and the trainers, with

praise and performance feedback provided. During role-

plays, participants were encouraged to utilize the self-

monitoring card upon accurate demonstration of the target

skill. Role-play ended contingent upon two consecutive

role-plays in which participants demonstrated 100 % skill

accuracy. Participants then played a social game that re-

quired use of the target skill (e.g., Go Fish for Expressing

Wants and Needs). Lastly, participants watched an

Table 1 Task analyses of target social skills

Body Basics Expressing Wants and Needs Responding to

Questions and

Requests

Conversation Maintenance

1. Face the person with head and

shoulders oriented towards

conversation partner

2. Make and sustain eye contact

for a minimum of 3 s

3. Use an appropriate voice with

volume appropriate for setting

4. Use the right expressing by

having facial expression match

conversation

5. Relax, evidenced by relaxed

shoulders, even paced speech,

and not playing with objects

1. Initiate Body Basics steps

2. Signal to conversation partner

that you want to talk (e.g., raise

hand, tap on shoulder, say name)

3. Wait for the person to respond to

the signal

4. Say what you want or need (e.g.,

‘‘I need…’’

5. Wait for the person to respond

6. Acknowledge their reply (e.g.,

okay, thank you)

1. Stop current

activity

2. Acknowledge

question by

initiation of Body

Basics steps

3. Maintain eye

contact while the

other person is

speaking

4. Provide an

appropriate

response to the

question

1. Initiate Body Basics steps upon cue from

conversation partner (e.g., ‘‘I like to watch

movies’’

2. Make an appropriate comment or ask a

question about what the person says (e.g.,

‘‘What is your favorite movie?’’

3. Maintain eye contact while the other person

is speaking

4. Make an appropriate comment or ask a

question about what the person says (e.g., ‘‘I

like that move too, it is really funny’’)

3050 J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:3048–3054

123

animated comic that reviewed the target skill (Fig. 1).

Social skills training during the second session of each

week was identical to the first, except that the social game

was not played. Probes of skill accuracy in the training and

generalization setting were completed at the end of each

session.

Maintenance

Following demonstration of skill mastery, previously

taught skills were probed in both settings to determine the

extent to which the skill steps were maintained over

4 weeks for the Body Basics skill, 3 weeks for the Wants

and Needs skill, and 2 weeks for the Responding skill, with

length of maintenance phase varying across skills due to

use of a multiple probe design. Procedures for maintenance

phase probes were identical to baseline probes.

Interobserver Agreement

Interobserver agreement (IOA) was obtained by trained

graduate students independently and simultaneously with

the primary observer. IOA was calculated by dividing the

number of agreements of skills demonstrated by the num-

ber of agreements plus disagreements and multiplied by

100. IOA was calculated during 42 % of observations for

Taylor and 58 % of observations for Robby. Overall IOA

for Taylor was 97 % (range 50–100 %) and 100 % for

Robby. In addition, Kappa was also calculated and was

found to be at 0.94 for Taylor (95 % CI 0.89–0.98) and

1.00 for Robby (95 % CI 1.00–1.00).

Treatment Integrity

Treatment integrity was assessed during each intervention

session via an intervention manual-derived treatment in-

tegrity checklist. The checklist was completed by the pri-

mary facilitator and another trained graduate student

independently throughout each session. Intervention pro-

cedures were found to be conducted with 100 % integrity

for each session. Additionally, IOA for treatment integrity

was 100 %.

Data Analysis

The effects of participation in the intervention on target

social skill accuracy were evaluated via visual analysis of

level, trend, and variability of data.

Nonoverlap of all pairs (NAP; Parker and Vannest

2009), a nonparametric method for determining the degree

of data overlap between each intervention point in a phase

(e.g., baseline) and each intervention point in a comparison

phase (e.g., intervention), was also calculated using pro-

cedures described by Parker and Vannest. NAP scores

between 0.00 and 0.65 are considered weak, from 0.66 to

0.92 are moderate, and scores of 0.93–1.00 are considered

strong effects.

Results

Skill Acquisition

Taylor’s skill accuracy data across each skill were variable

during baseline (Fig. 2). Implementation of the Super-

heroes Social Skills program resulted in immediate and

abrupt improvements in level and reductions in variability

in training and generalization probes. During the mainte-

nance phase, Taylor demonstrated maintained improve-

ments in skill accuracy in both training and generalization

Fig. 1 Example of animated superhero providing skill rationale, a

video model, and an animated comic for Expressing Wants and Needs

skill

J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:3048–3054 3051

123

settings. Calculation of NAP revealed improvements

ranging from moderate to strong across each skill and

setting (Table 2).

Robby demonstrated low and variable levels of skill accu-

racy during baseline (Fig. 3). Immediate and abrupt improve-

ments in accuracy were noted following implementation of

intervention in both training and generalization probes. During

maintenance phases, Robby demonstrated maintained im-

provements in skill accuracy for all skills probed. Calculation of

NAP indicated strong intervention effects across skills and

settings (Table 2).

Social Functioning

Social functioning of participants was assessed via the

ASSP, administered to parents prior to and immediately

following intervention. Both participants demonstrated

clinically significant improvements on the ASSP Total

Score and Reciprocity subscale, with moderate improve-

ments on the Participation/Avoidance subscale (Table 3).

Whereas Taylor’s score demonstrated moderate improve-

ments on the Detrimental Social Behaviors subscale,

Robby’s score demonstrated minimal improvement fol-

lowing intervention.

Discussion

The present study sought to replicate and address the

limitations in assessment of generalization of Radley et al.

(2014b). Both participants in the study demonstrated im-

mediate increases in level and trend of skill acquisition in

the training setting following introduction of intervention.

In probes of generalization to communication partners with

whom patterns of communication were previously estab-

lished, both participants demonstrated abrupt improve-

ments in skill accuracy without the provision of

performance feedback. This finding expands upon results

of Radley et al., which indicated improvements in

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe rc

en ta

ge o

f s te

ps

co rr

ec t

Body Basics

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe rc

en ta

ge o

f s te

ps

co rr

ec t

Wants and Needs

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe rc

en ta

ge o

f s te

ps

co rr

ec t

Responding

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe rc

en ta

ge o

f s te

ps

co rr

ec t

Conversation

Generalization Training

Probe

BL INT MT

Fig. 2 Percentage of steps correctly demonstrated in training and

generalization settings, Taylor

Table 2 NAP effect size for skill acquisition

Taylor Robby

Treatment Generalization Treatment Generalization

Body Basics intervention 1.00 (0.16–1.84) 1.00 (0.16–1.84) 0.97 (0.33–1.53) 1.00 (0.23–1.78)

Body Basics maintenance 1.00 (0.23–1.78) 1.00 (0.16–1.84) 1.00 (0.29–1.71) 1.00 (0.23–1.78)

Expressing Wants and Needs intervention 1.00 (0.39–1.60) 1.00 (0.23–1.78) 1.00 (0.26–1.64) 1.00 (0.26–1.74)

Expressing Wants and Needs maintenance 1.00 (0.29–1.71) 1.00 (0.23–1.78) 1.00 (0.29–1.71) 1.00 (0.26–1.74)

Responding to Questions intervention 0.78 (0.04–1.17) 0.83 (-0.04 to 1.38) 0.93 (0.28–1.36) 1.00 (0.26–1.74)

Responding to Questions maintenance 0.94 (0.20–1.55) 0.83 (-0.04 to 1.38) 1.00 (0.31–1.69) 1.00 (0.26–1.74)

Conversation intervention 0.95 (0.27–1.55) 0.94 (0.23–1.55) 0.97 (0.39–1.48) 1.00 (0.33–1.67)

NAP effect size scores below 0.65 are considered weak, scores between 0.66 and 0.92 are considered moderate, and scores ranging from 0.93 to

1.00 are considered strong (Parker and Vannest 2009). Strong effects in bold. Ninety percent confidence intervals in parentheses

3052 J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:3048–3054

123

generalized skill use in the presence of performance feed-

back. Additionally, accurate skill use was maintained in

both settings. However, maintenance data in the current

study were collected over a short period and conclusions

regarding maintenance are therefore limited. Demonstra-

tion of generalization and short-term maintenance are,

however, notable, as prior research suggested that gener-

alization of skills is one of the most challenging aspects of

social skills training (Barry et al. 2003) and social skills

training has limited impact on generalization and

maintenance of skills (Bellini et al. 2007). Generalization

observed in the current study could be due to Superheroes

Social Skills’ incorporation of generalization technologies

identified by Stokes and Osnes (1989), namely: the use of

current functional contingencies (i.e. use of natural con-

sequences of social skills use), training diversely (i.e. social

game, video models), and engaging functional mediators of

behavior (i.e. self-monitoring).

Both participants demonstrated improvements in post-

intervention Total Social Functioning scores on the parent-

completed ASSP, which suggests that Taylor and Robby

may have utilized the targeted social skills outside of the

clinical setting (i.e. home, community). Similar to data

collected regarding improvements in skill accuracy fol-

lowing social skills training, improvements in social

functioning noted by parents on the ASSP support previous

research indicating generalized skill use following par-

ticipation in the intervention (e.g., Radley et al. 2014a, b).

Overall, data collected in the current study indicate that

participation in the Superheroes Social Skills intervention

resulted in improved social competence for both par-

ticipants. It is, however, important to note that parent raters

were not blind to treatment conditions and outcomes

should be interpreted with this in mind.

Although results of the study indicate improved accu-

racy and generalization of target social skills, results should

be viewed in light of limitations. First, the present study

included two participants. Due to the small sample size,

conclusions regarding the generalizability of these findings

are limited. Future research should seek to evaluate the

effects of participation in the intervention with a larger

group of participants. Next, the Superheroes Social Skills

program involves multiple components to support acqui-

sition and generalization of social skills. As such, it is

difficult to identify which of the components was func-

tionally related to behavioral change. Further investigation

of the Superheroes Social Skills program strategies via a

component analysis is warranted. The four target social

skills were taught in the same order for both participants. It

is possible that some skills may be prerequisite for learning

other skills, and changing the sequence of skills may result

in different outcomes. Therefore, future studies may use

counterbalancing treatment designs to address this limita-

tion. Despite improvements in skill accuracy observed

during generalization probes, the fact that all generalization

probes took place within the clinic setting should be con-

sidered. As attendance to the social skills group may have

served as a discriminative stimulus for skill use, future

research should collect generalization probes in settings

that are clearly different than training settings (e.g., home).

Because ASSP data were collected as a pre- post- measure

with no control group, external variables may have con-

tributed to the observed improvements in parental report of

0

20

40

60

80

100

Body Basics

0

20

40

60

80

100

Wants and Needs

0

20

40

60

80

100

Responding

0 5 10 15 20 25 0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe rc

en ta

ge o

f s te

ps

co rr

ec t

Pe rc

en ta

ge o

f s te

ps

co rr

ec t

Pe rc

en ta

ge o

f s te

ps

co rr

ec t

Pe rc

en ta

ge o

f s te

ps

co rr

ec t

Conversation

Training Generalization

Probe

BL INT MT

Fig. 3 Percentage of steps correctly demonstrated in training and

generalization settings, Robby

Table 3 Pre- and post-intervention ASSP scores

Scale Taylor Robby

Pre Post Pre Post

Total Social Functioning 119 142 92 108

Social Reciprocity 58 69 37 47

Participation/Avoidance 25 29 25 28

Detrimental Social Behaviors 25 30 23 24

J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:3048–3054 3053

123

social functioning and data should be interpreted with

caution. Additionally, as parents were not blind to treat-

ment, rater expectation may have biased results. Finally,

long-term follow-up data were not collected as part of the

study. Long-term follow-up data of acquired skills would

assist in making conclusions about maintenance and add to

the generalizability of the results. Future research may

address this limitation by collecting long-term maintenance

data.

In summary, the intervention utilized in the current

study resulted in improvements in discrete social skill ac-

curacy, for two children, in a training setting. More no-

table, improvements in skill accuracy were observed during

probes delivered by communication partners with whom

patterns of communication were previously established and

who did not provide performance feedback. These findings

are divergent from those that have suggested social skills

training to be minimally effective in promoting generalized

and maintained behavior change (e.g., Bellini et al. 2007),

and results may be, in part, attributed to the incorporation

of multiple generalization technologies (Stokes and Osnes

1989) in the Superheroes Social Skills program. As pro-

gramming for generalization appears to have been benefi-

cial for the two participants in the current study,

researchers and practitioners working with individuals with

ASD are encouraged to consider incorporation of similar

strategies to promote skill generalization.

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical

manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Barry, T. D., Klinger, L. G., Lee, J. M., Palardy, N., Gilmore, T., &

Bodin, S. D. (2003). Examining the effectiveness of an

outpatient clinic-based social skills group for high-functioning

children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental

Disorders, 33, 685–701.

Bauminger, N., Shulman, C., & Agam, G. (2003). Peer interaction

and loneliness in high-functioning children with autism. Journal

of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 33, 489–508.

Bellini, S., & Hopf, A. (2007). The development of the autism social

skills profile: A preliminary analysis of psychometric properties.

Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 22,

80–87.

Bellini, S., Peters, J. K., Benner, L., & Hopf, A. (2007). A meta-

analysis of school-based social skills interventions for children

with autism spectrum disorders. Remedial and Special Educa-

tion, 28, 153–162.

Doggett, R. A., Krasno, A. M., Koegel, L. K., & Koegel, R. L. (2013).

Acquisition of multiple questions in the context of social

conversation in children with autism. Journal of Autism and

Developmental Disorders, 43, 2015–2025.

Gast, D. (2010). Single-subject research in behavioral sciences. New

York, NY: Routledge.

Gilliam, J. (2006). Gilliam autism rating scale (2nd ed.). Austin, TX:

PRO-ED.

Goin-Kochel, R. P., Myers, B. J., & Mackintosh, V. H. (2007).

Parental report on the use of treatments and therapies for

children with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism

Spectrum Disorders, 1, 195–209.

Harrison, P. L., & Oakland, T. (2003). Adaptive behavior assessment

system (2nd ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological

Corporation.

Howlin, P., Mawhood, L., & Rutter, M. (2000). Autism and

developmental receptive language disorder-A follow-up com-

parison in early adult lift. II: Social, behavioural, and psychiatric

outcomes. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41,

561–578.

Jenson, W. R., Bowen, J., Clark, E., Block, H., Gabriensen, T., Hood,

J., et al. (2011). Superheroes social skills. Eugene, OR: Pacific

Northwest.

Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (2004). Kaufman test of

educational achievement (2nd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American

Guidance Service.

Myles, B. S., Bock, S. J., & Simpson, R. L. (2001). Asperger

syndrome diagnostic scale. Autism, TX: PRO-ED.

Parker, R. I., & Vannest, K. (2009). An improved effect size for

single-case research: Nonoverlap of all pairs. Behavior Therapy,

40, 357–367.

Radley, K. C., Ford, W. B., Battaglia, A. A., & McHugh, M. B.

(2014a). The effects of social skills training on social engage-

ment of children with autism spectrum disorders in a generalized

recess setting. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental

Disabilities, 4, 216–229.

Radley, K. C., O’Handley, R. D., Ness, E. J., Ford, W. B., Battaglia,

A. A., & McHugh, M. B. (2014b). Promoting social skill use and

generalization in children with autism spectrum disorder.

Research in Autism Spectrum Disorder, 8, 241–255.

Rao, P. A., Beidel, D. C., & Murray, M. J. (2008). Social skills

interventions for children with Asperger’s syndrome and high

functioning autism: A review and recommendations. Journal of

Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 353–361.

Roid, G. H. (2003). Stanford–Binet intelligence scales (5th ed.).

Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside.

Stokes, T. F., & Osnes, P. G. (1989). An operant pursuit of

generalization. Behavior Therapy, 20, 337–355.

Strain, P. S., & Schwartz, I. (2001). ABA and the development of

meaningful social relations for young children with autism.

Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 16,

120–128.

Wechsler, D. (2003). Wechsler intelligence scale for children (4th

ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

Wechsler, D. (2009). Wechsler individual achievement test (3rd ed.).

San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

3054 J Autism Dev Disord (2015) 45:3048–3054

123

Copyright of Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders is the property of Springer Science & Business Media B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.