Homeworks academic service


Competitiveness of students with autism spectrum disorder essay

Each child was administered the core battery for their particular age group using the procedure outlined in the test manual. Module 3 was used in the present study. This measure was administered and scored according to the manual by the first author, who met reliability criteria with the second author, who was trained to research reliability.

The SCQ Rutter et al.

Competitiveness of Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder Essay Sample

It was given to parents of both groups of children to verify that the children with ASD still carry their diagnoses and to ensure that the TD children did not have autism or the broader autism phenotype. FB Understanding To assess first-order FB understanding, we administered the Smarties task Gopnik and Astington 1988an unexpected contents task, and the Maxi task Wimmer and Perner 1983an unexpected displacement task.

Children who passed at least one of the first-order FB tasks were given two-second-order unexpected displacement FB tasks: All FB tasks were acted out using figurines of people and other objects. The proportion correct on first- and second-order tasks was calculated. If children failed a memory control question on a task, their score on that task was not used in calculating their proportion correct.

The procedure involved placing children in a situation in which they were tempted to commit a transgression i. On the first two trials, the audio clue was associated with the toy placed behind them e.

  • This resulted in a matched sample of 79 typical peers;
  • Remember to maintain the accent on holding merriment;
  • Lie-telling propensity and ability could only be assessed for children who peeked at the toy;
  • Thus, we studied differences in the social involvement of children both with and without autism at different grade levels.

On the test trial, the toy was paired with a Christmas song such that the child could not guess the identity of the toy based on the sound it made. E1 told the children that she would leave them in the room with the sound playing and instructed them not to turn around to look at the toy while she was gone.

The antisocial lie question and semantic leakage control questions measured antisocial lie-telling propensity i. Lie-telling propensity and ability could only be assessed for children who peeked at the toy. For the antisocial lie question, a score of one was given for denying they had peeked. Children were given an unattractive prize for winning a game.

To determine what should be used as the unattractive prize, at the beginning of the session children went into the experimental room with E2 while E1 was in another room. E2 took out four attractive, age-appropriate toys and a plain white bar of soap from a basket and asked them which prize they liked the best, and which prize they did not like. Children played a guessing game with E1 where they were promised a prize for making five correct guesses.

After four correct guesses, E2 interrupted and asked E1 to leave the room. Since we expected that most children would indicate that they did not like the bar of soap, a bar of soap was pre-wrapped in a piece of black garbage bag when given to the child. E2 told the child to open his or her prize before placing the wrapped bar of soap in front of them and leaving the room for 1 min, during which the child had the opportunity to see what the prize was and to react to such an unexpected prize.

White lie-telling ability was scored on a scale from zero to three: Children were then asked if they would like to exchange their prize for something else from the basket. Whether or not they chose to exchange their prize was a check that children did not like the bar of soap or whatever they received as their prize. Procedure Children were tested individually in the laboratory over two sessions with each session lasting anywhere from 45 to 90 min.

While most participants completed the two sessions on different days, a few participants who travelled from out-of-town completed the sessions in 1 day, with a break in competitiveness of students with autism spectrum disorder essay each session. On average, the second testing session was completed within 3 weeks of the first session.

The tasks were partially counterbalanced across children. Children did not receive feedback on whether their responses were correct on the standardized tests and FB tasks; however, the children received encouragement for staying on task. Breaks were given when the child seemed tired or when necessary for maintaining rapport.

All children, regardless of whether or not they had lied, were given a thorough debriefing. The study was approved by the university research ethics board and parental consent as well as child assent was obtained prior to testing each participant. Results Preliminary Analyses Reliability Analysis The behaviors and responses of all of the children on tasks other than the standardized measures were independently coded by the first author and a research assistant who was blind to diagnosis and the hypotheses of the study.

Discrepancies between scores given by the two coders were resolved through discussion. Order Effects As participants were randomly assigned one of four testing orders, we ran a series of analyses to ensure there were no effects of condition on any of the variables.

We found no significant differences in scores between conditions for the ASD group and for the TD group.

Peeking Behavior in the Temptation Resistance Paradigm The propensity and ability to tell antisocial lies could only be assessed for those who peeked at the toy. Desirability of the Bar of Soap in the Undesirable Gift Paradigm The propensity and ability to tell white lies could not be assessed in seven TD children and one child with ASD because they were given a different version of the undesirable gift paradigm.

In this earlier version of the paradigm, parents, rather than E2, were sent into the experimental room to probe how their child actually felt about their prize. However, these children claimed that they liked the bar of soap even when they were alone in the room with their mother; thus, we were unable to verify whether they did or did not like the bar of soap.

One additional TD child was excluded from the analysis because he did not pass the experimental check on the undesirability of the prize; that is, he did not want to trade the prize he had received for a more desirable prize. Two of the children with ASD did competitiveness of students with autism spectrum disorder essay show dislike for the bar of soap. These two children were not dropped from the analysis because when given the opportunity, both exchanged their prize for what they liked the best.

  • The procedure involved placing children in a situation in which they were tempted to commit a transgression i;
  • Effects of class size and gender, ethnicity and IQ of children with ASD were controlled within analyses, but produced the same pattern of results across grade groups, thus, original analyses are presented;
  • Discrepancies between scores given by the two coders were resolved through discussion;
  • Children who passed at least one of the first-order FB tasks were given two-second-order unexpected displacement FB tasks;
  • Based on Farmer and Farmer 1996 , p;
  • Our goal was to examine the patterns of social involvement of children with ASD in inclusive classrooms from kindergarten to fifth grade relative to a matched sample of typical peers to evaluate the social involvement of both groups across grade levels.

Thus, a total of 18 children in the ASD group and 22 children in the TD group were included in the analysis on white lie-telling propensity and ability.