Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders 4 (2010) 619–625

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders

Journal homepage: http://ees.elsevier.com/RASD/default.asp

Impact of training peers and children with autism on social skills during
center time activities in inclusive classrooms
Devender R. Banda a,*, Stephanie L. Hart b, Lan Liu-Gitz b
a
Department of Educational Psychology & Leadership, College of Education, PO Box 41701, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, United States
b
Department of Educational Psychology & Leadership, Texas Tech University, United States

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: This study was conducted to increase peer-to-peer social skills using direct instruction and
Received 26 November 2009 peer training in two elementary students with autism spectrum disorders in inclusion
Accepted 17 December 2009 settings. The participants and their non-disabled peers were trained to initiate and
respond to each other during center time, academic activities. We used a multiple-baseline
Keywords: design across participants to determine the effects of the intervention. Increased
Autism initiations and responses in all participants were noted. Implications for practice and
Direct instruction research are discussed.
Peer training
ß 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Pervasive Developmental Disorder-Not Ot-
herwise Specified (PDD-NOS)
Social skills

1. Introduction

Students with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) display significant deficits in social skills in a wide variety of settings. In
schools, students with ASD may display several problems in social skills involving peers and/or adults, such as: making eye
contact, recognizing or displaying nonverbal body language, participating in cooperative play, beginning or sustaining
conversation, responding appropriately to conversations or nonverbal expressions, and developing lasting friendships. Such
characteristics make it difficult for typical children to engage in and maintain social interactions with children with ASD
(Gonzalez-Lopez & Kamps, 1997). Identifying successful social skills interventions may enhance adaptive behavior, social
acceptance, or independence in students with ASD (Bellini, Peters, Benner, & Hopf, 2007; Scott, Clark, & Brady, 2000). Thus,
improving social skills in students with ASD is one of the most important and central goals for teachers in educational and
noneducational settings (Gonzalez-Lopez & Kamps, 1997; Matson, Matson, & Rivet, 2007; Pollard, 1998).
There have been several social skills interventions for children with ASD including peer training, adult or peer modeling,
script/script fading, priming, direct instruction, reinforcement, video modeling, group social skills training, etc. In this study,
peer-mediated strategies that involved simultaneous training of children with ASD and/or their typical peers through direct
instruction (e.g., modeling, reinforcement, prompting, fading) are reviewed. For reviews of social skills interventions with
persons with ASD, see Bellini et al. (2007), DiSalvo and Oswald (2002), Matson et al. (2007), McConnell (2002), Pollard
(1998), Rogers (2000), Scattone (2007), White, Keonig, and Scahill (2007), and Wang and Spillane (2009).
Peer-mediated interventions are one of the most often used methods to increase social interactions between children
with and without disabilities (Goldstein, Kaczmarek, Pennington, & Shafer, 1992). Peer interventions typically involve

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 806 742 1997x305; fax: +1 806 742 2179.
E-mail address: [email protected] (D.R. Banda).

1750-9467/$ – see front matter ß 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2009.12.005
620 D.R. Banda et al. / Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders 4 (2010) 619–625

training peers to initiate interaction and/or respond to social initiations made by children with ASD (Pollard, 1998; Rogers,
2000). However, several researchers indicated that peer training alone is not sufficient to improve social interactions (see
DiSalvo & Oswald, 2002; Sainato, Goldstein, & Strain, 1992). Continuous adult prompting and reinforcement of social
interactions in natural settings is important for maintenance and generalization of social skills (Odom & Watts, 1991). For
example, a recent comprehensive review of social skill interventions with persons with ASD indicates that modeling and
reinforcement are the most popular strategies used in published research (Matson et al., 2007). Thus, including components
of modeling and reinforcement in peer-mediated interventions may be the most efficient and effective way to improve social
skills in students with ASD in natural settings.
Several studies have been conducted in which children with ASD and their typical peers were simultaneously trained to
initiate, share, and respond to social skills (see Goldstein et al., 1992; Odom & Strain, 1986; Odom & Watts, 1991; Sainato
et al., 1992). For example, Odom and Strain (1986) trained three preschool children with autism to initiate and share with
peers. Also, the investigators trained four preschool children who were prompted by their teachers to initiate and play with
students with autism. Teacher prompts increased initiations of students with autism and peer training enhanced social
responses. In another study, Gonzalez-Lopez and Kamps (1997) investigated the effectiveness of several social skill training
approaches involving typical peers (e.g., prompting, reinforcing, ignoring the disruptive behavior). The peers and students
with autism were trained to initiate greetings, play, imitate, share, take turns, ask for help, and request things. Four children
with autism participated in this study. Three of four participants increased social initiations and decreased problem
behaviors at the end of the intervention.
Research on peer-mediated social skills interventions further indicates that a majority of studies were conducted in play
or small groups that involved non-academic activities (e.g., toys and other play material). The studies were conducted in play
areas or play groups (Goldstein et al., 1992; Kamps et al., 2002; Nelson, McDonnell, Johnston, Crompton, & Nelson, 2007;
Odom & Strain, 1986; Sawyer, Luiselli, Ricciardi, & Gower, 2005; Shafer, Egel, & Neef, 1984; Strain, Kerr, & Ragland, 1979);
during typical classroom activities and games involving toys (Gonzalez-Lopez & Kamps, 1997; Kamps et al., 2002; Thiemann
& Goldstein, 2004); or during lunch and recess (Kamps et al., 2002; Owen-DeSchryver, Carr, Cale, & Blakeley-Smith, 2008).
However, few studies were conducted in cooperative learning groups (Kamps et al., 2002) and during center time activities
to enhance social skills in children with autism (Nelson et al., 2007).
Nelson et al. (2007) investigated social skills using center time activities involving play groups with children with autism
and their non-disabled peers in an elementary school. The investigators used a packaged intervention (‘‘Keys to Play,’’ a
visual intervention strategy) in which peers were trained to interact with children with autism. In addition, target children
were trained in social initiations through modeling and prompting. The intervention package was successful in teaching
children with autism to initiate entry into play groups. Also, the participants were drawn to specific play material in learning
center which enhanced social initiations and time engaged in social play. However, this study did not involve any academic
center time activities.
Kamps et al. (2002) conducted two group studies to enhance social skills in students with autism and their general
education peers. In Study 1, typical elementary peers (N = 51) were trained to tutor five children with autism in vocabulary
and facts from social studies curricula. Target behaviors included initiating and responding to peers, cooperating, and
engaging in positive interaction during play activities. Training consisted of introduction to social skills and modeling by the
researchers, individual and group responding, student-to-student practice of the skill and review. Later, students
participated in 10- to 15-min play-time sessions. Students received points for appropriate social interactions. When
compared to a control group, students’ social interactions with peers increased with intervention across academic and social
contexts and the students in cooperative learning groups showed higher generalization than those in control social groups.
In Study 2, the authors investigated the maintenance and generalization effects. Participants included 34 students with
autism (7–14 years) across six school districts. Approximately 250 peers participated in a 2-year study. Peer mediation
programs included social skills/games/play groups, lunch buddy groups, recess buddy programs, and tutoring buddy
programs (i.e., peers tutoring students with autism in language, reading, and math). Greater generalization was seen with
students who participated in trained groups compared to untrained groups or unfamiliar. However, because this study used
an intervention package, it is difficult to determine the specific effects on social skills used during academic activities.
Overall, the majority of studies have been conducted during play and related activities. It is obvious that social interactions
take place throughout the day during both academic and non-academic activities. However, the literature is scant on social
skills in which interactions take place during typical academic activities, such as center time. It is therefore imperative to
investigate the effects of social skills training of children with ASD and their typical peers during center time activities. The
primary purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of training both students with ASD and their typical peers to
improve social initiations and responses during academic-related center time activities in the general education classrooms.

2. Method

2.1. Participants

This study included two participants and two to three typical peers per participant. A third participant began the study
but was later excluded due to unrelated illness which caused him to miss several weeks of school during the study. Only data
for the two participants who completed the study are included.
 D.R. Banda et al. / Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders 4 (2010) 619–625 621

Alex was a 6-year-old boy diagnosed at age three with moderate speech impairment and Pervasive Developmental
Disorder-Not Otherwise Specified (PPD-NOS). Diagnostic tests to assess full scale IQ estimated a score of 86 on the Kaufman
Assessment Battery for Children—II (Kaufman & Kaufman, 2004) and a score of 82 on the Wechsler Preschool and Primary
Scale of Intelligence—III (Wechsler, 2002). His adaptive behavior composite score on the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales
was 62 (Sparrow, Balla, & Cicchetti, 1984), and his standard total language score was 78 on the Preschool Language Scales—3
(Zimmerman, Steiner, & Pond, 1992).
Alex attended a general education kindergarten class in a public school. He received speech therapy 1 hr per week;
occupational therapy 30 min per week; and adaptive physical education 30 min, four times per week. Alex demonstrated
limited social interactions with peers in his classroom. During small group activities, he would sit at the table with his peers
and smile but not participate in activities. His teachers report that he rarely initiated conversation with peers and often did
not respond to initiations from his peers. When doing activities or games that required turn-taking, Alex did not object when
his turn was skipped or when others played his turn for him. Although Alex did not often talk to his peers, he often initiated
conversation with adults and responded to their questions. His teachers estimated that his language use was on par with the
language use of his 5-year-old peers.
Bret was a 6-year-old boy who was born 2 months prematurely, had a moderate speech delay, and had recently been
diagnosed as having PDD-NOS. Bret had a twin brother who was also born prematurely, had a moderate speech
delay and was diagnosed with PPD-NOS. Only limited diagnostic information was available. Scores on the
Developmental Profile II (Alpern, Boll, & Shearer, 1988) indicated delays greater than 20 months in the areas of
self-help and social skills. Using parent forms, his mother indicted that Bret scored within normal limits for his age in
adaptive skills and daily behavior on the Behavioral Assessment System for Children—Parent Rating Scale (Reynolds &
Kamphaus, 1992). Survey results from his mother also indicated average scores for social skills on the Social Skills
Rating System—Parent form (Gresham & Elliot, 1990) with slight delays in assertiveness, responsibility, and self-control
skills. Although his parents reported average social skills at home, Bret demonstrated significantly delayed social skills
at school.
Bret attended a different general education kindergarten class in the same school as Alex. Bret received speech
therapy once a week for 1 hr. Bret demonstrated no voluntary social interactions with his peers. During small group
activities, he would walk around the room from activity to activity rather than sit with his designated group. When he
found an activity he preferred, he would play alone and talk softly to himself. His teacher reported that he generally
ignored both adults and peers who spoke to him. He generally responded to instructions from adults that were delivered
to him individually at close range (1 m) and accompanied by physical prompts. Unlike Alex, Bret demonstrated
communication levels far below that of his peers. His teachers estimated his level of communication to be equivalent to
the skills of a 2-year-old.

2.2. Setting

The study took place in two general education kindergarten classes. Alex was in one class, and Bret was in another. Each
class had 15–20 students both with and without disabilities. Each classroom was 250  350 . The study occurred during center
time, when all students in the class were placed into small groups of 3–5 students and rotated through 5–10 activities daily
spending 10–15 min in each activity. The activities were academic in nature and consisted of independent or small group
tasks to reinforce previously taught skills in math, language, writing, and fine motor skills. For this study, students were only
observed in center activities that included cooperative play or shared materials. Sample activities included writing and
coloring (writing/tracing words and drawing/coloring a picture), fine motor play (manipulate/sort various small objects),
and games (simple board games for 2–3 players with dice). The activities occurred around the room at stations positioned at
tables and on the floor.

2.3. Dependent variables and measurement

We examined two dependent variables: initiations and responses. Initiations were defined as verbal peer-to-peer
interactions consisting of a question asked of or a comment made toward another student to begin a conversation. Responses
were defined as verbal, peer-to-peer interactions consisting of questions, comments, or responses to questions occurring
during an ongoing conversation. Comments referring to another student’s conversation or materials were scored as an
‘‘initiation’’ if the comment was used to begin conversation or scored as a ‘‘response’’ if comment was in response to an
initiation or response by another student. For this study, initiations and responses toward adults were not recorded. See
Table 1 for specific examples of initiations and responses.
The dependent variables—initiations and responses—were recorded using a frequency count during 10-min sessions
occurring during one rotation of centers in the classroom. Data were collected by the second author (referred to as the
investigator in the subsequent sections) immediately following the training sessions. During data collection, the investigator
sat at the table or on the floor at the target center and prompted the peer and participants as needed. All training and data
collection sessions were conducted by the investigator while the classroom teacher interacted with and assisted non-
participating students in the classroom. Generally, data were collected 2–3 days per week for a single 10-min session each
day for the length of the study.
622 D.R. Banda et al. / Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders 4 (2010) 619–625

Table 1
Definitions of dependent variables.

Dependent variable Purpose Example from intervention script

Peer-to-peer initiations Asking for help ‘‘Can you help me?’’

Offering help ‘‘Do you need help?’’
Asking for material ‘‘Can you give me the _____?’’
Asking for a turn ‘‘Can I use the _____ next?’’
Making comment ‘‘I like your _____.’’
‘‘Look at this!’’

Peer-to-peer responses Responding to requests for help ‘‘I’ll help you.’’

Responding to offers of help ‘‘I need help with _____.’’
Responding to requests for material ‘‘Here is the _____.’’
Responding to requests for a turn ‘‘Okay. Here you go.’’
‘‘You can have it in a minute.’’
Making comment ‘‘I like your _____.’’
‘‘That’s a cool _____.’’

2.4. Design

A multiple-baseline across participants design was implemented to determine the effectiveness of direct instruction and
peer training for increasing occurrences of initiations and responses between students with ASD and their typical peers. The
intervention began with the first participant, Alex, who showed stable baseline frequencies of initiating and responding. The
intervention was then introduced to one participant at a time as each participant demonstrated stable baseline levels. Data
were graphed and visually analyzed to assess the effectiveness of the intervention by comparing data within and between
phases (i.e., level, trend, and variability).

2.5. Procedure

2.5.1. Baseline
During baseline, we observed social interactions of the two participants and their peers during scheduled center time as
described previously. In order to hear the students’ conversations, the observer sat within one foot of the participants and
peers. For centers that took place on the floor, the observer sat on the floor; for centers that took place at a table, the observer
sat in a chair one foot from the table. The investigator recorded initiations toward and responses to peers for a 10-min data
collection session. The participants’ attempts to address the authors, other adults in the room, or peers in other centers were
not recorded.

2.5.2. Intervention
The intervention had two parts: a 4- to 5-min training session that occurred before the data collection period and adult
prompts that occurred during the data collection period. The intervention was conducted by the investigator in this study. To
preserve the natural environment of a general education setting, students were trained in the classroom in each center with
materials routinely used in that center. The investigator sat with the students at the table or on the floor during training and
while prompting during data collection sessions.
The first part of the intervention, participant and peer training, occurred during a training period which took place
immediately prior to data collection sessions in the intervention phase. Participants and peers were trained simultaneously
by the investigator to ask questions of their peers and answer questions asked by their peers. First, the investigator modeled
appropriate initiations by asking a peer a question (‘‘Can I use the glue?’’). The investigator prompted each participant and
each peer to ask a question of another student in the group (‘‘Alex, can you ask her a question?’’). If a student was unable to
independently ask a question, the investigator modeled a question and prompted the student to repeat the question (‘‘Alex,
say, ‘Can I have a turn?’’’). The investigator praised each student’s attempt to ask a question (‘‘Good job asking for the glue.’’).
Each student who was asked a question either answered the question independently or was prompted by the investigator to
answer the question. Next, the investigator modeled appropriate responses by verbally prompting a student to ask the
investigator a question. Then the investigator answered the question that the student asked. For example, the investigator
would say, ‘‘Alex, ask me what color I want.’’ Alex said, ‘‘What color do you want?’’, and the investigator modeled an
appropriate answer, ‘‘I want the red crayon.’’ The investigator prompted each participant and each peer to ask a question of
another student in the group in order to create an opportunity for each student to answer a peer’s question (‘‘Alex, ask her
what color she wants.’’). If a student was unable to independently ask or answer a question, the investigator modeled a
question or response and prompted the student to repeat the question or response (‘‘Alex, can I have the glue? Say, ‘Sure.’’’).
The investigator praised each student’s attempt to answer their peers’ questions (‘‘Good job answering.’’).
The second part of the intervention, adult prompting, took place during data collection sessions of the intervention phase.
The investigator prompted both participants and peers to ask questions of their peers and answer their peers’ questions
(‘‘Alex, can you ask for the color you need? Who can answer Alex’s question?’’). During natural breaks in the students’
 D.R. Banda et al. / Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders 4 (2010) 619–625 623

conversation, the investigator randomly chose a student to prompt to ask a question of another group member. If the group
member responded spontaneously, then no response prompts were needed. If the group member did not respond
spontaneously, then the investigator prompted the student to answer his/her peer. (‘‘Alex, she asked for the green crayon.
What is your answer?’’). In general, the investigator prompted initiations within 5 s of a natural break in conversation and
responses within 5 s of a peer asking a question.

2.6. Interobserver agreement

A trained graduate student (third author) recorded interobserver agreement. Data were collected for 29% of sessions
for Alex and 23% of sessions for Bret. The second and third authors independently recorded the incidents of peer-to-peer
initiations and peer-to-peer responses for each 10-min session. Interobserver agreement for initiations was calculated
using a total agreement approach (Kennedy, 2005), by summing the total number of initiations recorded by each
observer, dividing the smaller total by the larger total, and multiplying the amount by 100. Likewise, interobserver
agreement for responses was calculated by dividing the smaller total of responses by the larger total of responses and
multiplying by 100. Mean interobserver agreement for Alex was 81% (range 62–92%) for initiations and 93% (range 93–
100%) for responses. For Bret, mean interobserver agreement was 73% (range 50–89%) for initiations and 76% (range 50–
100%) for responses.

2.7. Procedural integrity

Procedural integrity data were collected by the third author using a checklist of steps in the intervention. Procedural
integrity was collected for 24% of sessions for Alex and 15% of sessions for Bret. Mean procedural integrity was 96% (range
84–100%) for Alex and 95% (range 90–100%) for Bret.

Fig. 1. Frequency of initiations and responses for Alex and Bret.

624 D.R. Banda et al. / Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders 4 (2010) 619–625

3. Results

Fig. 1 shows the results of initiations and responses during baseline and intervention phases for Alex and Bret.
During baseline, Alex’s average initiations were 1.0 (range 0–2). During intervention, Alex’s average initiations were 9.7
(range 4–17). During baseline, Bret’s average initiations were .5 (range 0–2). During intervention, Bret’s average
initiations were 9.4 (range 7–15). During baseline, Alex’s average responses were 1.0 (all values of 1). During
intervention, Alex’s average responses were 9.3 (range 5–13). During baseline, Bret’s average responses were .63 (range
0–3). During intervention, Bret’s average responses were 8.2 (range 5–12). Results clearly show increased initiations
and responses with no percentage of non-overlapping data points (PND; Scruggs, Mastropieri, Cook, & Escobar, 1986) for
both participants.

4. Discussion

This study was conducted to enhance peer-to-peer social skills in two elementary students with ASD using direct
instruction and peer training in general education classrooms during center time academic activities. Results indicated that
the social skills intervention provided immediate and robust improvements of social initiations and responses in both
participants. Involving peers in center time activities was effective in improving social skills in the participants with ASD.
This study results indicates that there is an emerging need to provide multiple opportunities for social interactions not only
in non-academic social groups but also in group settings with academic activities.
The intervention may have been successful because it incorporated strategies that are known to work with children with
ASD and other disabilities—explicit modeling, prompting, and reinforcement (Kamps et al., 2002; Matson et al., 2007; Odom
& Strain, 1984; Strain & Odom, 1986). Some important features of this study include (a) utilizing center time activities which
involved academic tasks to enhance social interactions between peers; (b) using inclusive setting to enhance social
interactions among children with ASD and their peers; (c) using teacher directed instruction to train children with ASD and
their peers through modeling, prompting, and reinforcement; and (d) participation of students with ASD (i.e., PDD-NOS) and
their non-disabled peers.
This intervention may be most successful when used with a defined student profile. To gain the maximum benefit from
typical peers, candidates for this intervention are students placed in general education or inclusive settings. Future
researchers should explore the possibility of conducting studies involving students with severe cognitive delays who are
included in general education classrooms. While age-appropriate language skills are not necessary, the student should be
able to demonstrate communicative intent when interacting with adults or peers.
This study contributes to the literature on social skills training by demonstrating how direct instruction and peer
training can be used jointly in general education settings, particularly during center time academic activities. This study
further supports the findings of previous studies (Kamps et al., 2002; Laushey & Heflin, 2000; Morrison, Kamps, Garcia,
& Parker, 2001). Additionally, this study provides a new line of research that could be used for creating social
opportunities for children with ASD with their peers in typical group activities that are academic in nature. Previous
research on social skills is heavily centered on play groups or social groups involving toys or other play material. While
social skills training during play activities allows access to highly-preferred and student-selected materials, this study
proposes that more opportunities for interaction improves social skills in children with ASD irrespective of type of
activities. However, results of this study should be considered preliminary until further evidence in this area is gathered
through replications.

4.1. Implications

This study has several implications for researchers and practitioners. Selection of task or materials that require frequent
social exchanges during center time activities should be used. For example, some children with ASD may simply obtain
required material (e.g., crayons) and continue to engage in solitary play with the materials until an adult or a peer prompts to
request or exchange. Thus, activities that involve more social opportunities should be selected. When planning for the
intervention, future investigators may plan or arrange to use activities that require cooperation, such as having the group of
students jointly work on a puzzle. Also selecting a set of materials for the groups rather than giving each student his/her own
materials may create additional social opportunities. For example, a group could share one or two boxes of crayons. This
provides a natural opportunity for students to ask each other for particular colors of crayons. Future researchers should
address this issue.

4.2. Limitations

This study has some limitations. Maintenance and generalization data were not collected due to time constraints
and end of the school year. It is unclear if the results obtained in the study would generalize to untrained peers
or groups. Interobserver agreements in this study ranged between 50% and 100% due to complexity of social
interactions. Future researchers may want to videotape the interactions to increase interobserver agreement (80% or
above).
 D.R. Banda et al. / Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders 4 (2010) 619–625 625

4.3. Conclusions

This intervention contributes to the literature on social skills training by demonstrating how direct instruction and peer
training can be used jointly in general education settings. This study is a preliminary examination of the social skills
necessary for participation in academic activities. The study also demonstrates how teachers can increase social skills
beyond play groups or specific social skills training by embedding training into academic activities. Further research is
needed to replicate the finding and to assess for maintenance and generalization skills learned to new settings or untrained
peers.

References

Alpern, G., Boll, T., & Shearer, M. (1988). Developmental Profile II. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
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 Education, 28, 153–162.
DiSalvo, C. A., & Oswald, D. P. (2002). Peer-mediated interventions to increase the social interaction of children with autism: Consideration of peer expectancies.
Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 17, 198–207.
Goldstein, H., Kaczmarek, L., Pennington, R., & Shafer, K. (1992). Peer-mediated intervention: Attending to, commenting on, and acknowledging the behavior of
preschoolers with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 289–305.
Gonzalez-Lopez, A, & Kamps, D. (1997). Social skills training to increase social interactions between children with autism and their typical peers. Focus on Autism
and Other Developmental Disabilities, 12, 2–14.
Gresham, F. M., & Elliot, S. N. (1990). The Social Skills Rating System. Circle Pines, MN: The American Guidnace Service Inc.
Kamps, D., Royer, J., Dugan, E., Kravits, T., Gonzalez-Lopez, A., Garcia, J., et al. (2002). Peer training to facilitate social interaction for elementary students with
autism and their peers. Exceptional Children, 68, 173–187.
Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (2004). Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children-Second Edition (KABC-II). Circle Pines, MN: AGS Publishing.
Kennedy, C. H. (2005). Single-case designs for educational research. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Laushey, K. M., & Heflin, L. J. (2000). Enhancing social skills of kindergarten children with autism through the training of multiple peers as tutors. Journal of Autism
and Developmental Disorders, 30, 183–193.
Matson, J. L., Matson, M. L., & Rivet, T. T. (2007). Social-skills treatments for children with autism spectrum disorders: An overview. Behavior Modification, 31, 682–
707.
McConnell, S. R. (2002). Interventions to facilitate social interaction for young children with autism: Review of available research and recommendations for
educational intervention and future research. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 32, 351–372.
Morrison, L., Kamps, D., Garcia, J., & Parker, D. (2001). Peer mediation and monitoring strategies to improve initiations and social skills for students with autism.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 3, 237–250.
Nelson, C., McDonnell, A. P., Johnston, S. S., Crompton, A., & Nelson, A. R. (2007). Keys to play: A strategy to increase the social interactions of young children with
autism and their typically developing peers. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 42, 165–181.
Odom, S. L., & Strain, P. S. (1984). Peer-mediated approaches to promoting children’s social interaction: A review. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 54, 544–557.
Odom, S. L., & Strain, P. S. (1986). A comparison of peer-initiation and teacher-antecedent interventions for promoting reciprocal social interaction of autistic
preschoolers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 19, 59–71.
Odom, S. L., & Watts, E. (1991). Reducing teacher prompts in peer-mediated interventions for young children with autism. Journal of Special Education, 25, 26–42.
Owen-DeSchryver, J. S., Carr, E. G., Cale, S. I., & Blakeley-Smith, A. (2008). Promoting social interactions between students with autism spectrum disorders and
their peers in inclusive school settings. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 23, 15–28.
Pollard, N. L. (1998). Development of social interaction skills in preschool children with autism: A review of the literature. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 20, 1–
16.
Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (1992). The Behavioral Assessment System for Children. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service Inc.
Rogers, S. J. (2000). Interventions that facilitate socialization in children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30, 399–409.
Sainato, D. M., Goldstein, H., & Strain, P. S. (1992). Effects of self-evaluation on preschool children’s use of social interaction strategies with their classmates with
autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 127–141.
Sawyer, L. M., Luiselli, J. K., Ricciardi, J. N., & Gower, J. L. (2005). Teaching a child with autism to share among peers in an integrated preschool classroom:
Acquisition, maintenance, and social validation. Education & Treatment of Children, 28, 1–10.
Scattone, D. (2007). Social skills interventions for children with autism. Psychology in the Schools, 44, 717–726.
Scott, J., Clark, C., & Brady, M. (2000). Students with autism: Characteristics and instructional programming. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., Cook, S. B., & Escobar, C. (1986). Early intervention for children with conduct disorders: A quantitative synthesis of single-subject
research. Behavioral Disorders, 11, 260–271.
Shafer, M. S., Egel, A. L., & Neef, N. A. (1984). Training mildly handicapped peers to facilitate changes in the social interaction skills of autistic children. Journal of
Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 461–476.
Sparrow, S. S., Balla, D. A., & Cicchetti, D. V. (1984). The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (Interview Edition). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
Strain, P. S., Kerr, M. M., & Ragland, E. U. (1979). Effects of peer-mediated social initiations and prompting/reinforcement procedures on the social behavior of
autistic children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 9, 41–54.
Strain, P. S., & Odom, S. L. (1986). Peer social initiations: Effective intervention for social skills development of exceptional children. Exceptional Children, 52, 543–
551.
Thiemann, K. S., & Goldstein, H. (2004). Effects of peer training and written text cueing on social communication of school-age children with Pervasive
Developmental Disorder. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 126–144.
Wang, P., & Spillane, A. (2009). Evidence-based social skills interventions for persons with autism: A meta-analysis. Education and Training in Developmental
Disabilities, 44, 318–342.
Wechsler, D. (2002). Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence-Third Edition (WPPSI-III). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
White, S. W., Keonig, K., & Scahill, L. (2007). Social skills development in children with autism spectrum disorders: A review of the intervention research. Journal of
Autism and Developmental Disoders, 37, 1858–1868.
Zimmerman, I. L., Steiner, V. G., & Pond, R. E. (1992). PLS-3: Preschool Language Scale-3. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.