Script Fading to Teach an Adult with Autism to Memorize Dramatic Scripts

Abstract

The goal of this study was to determine whether the script fading procedure (SFP) could effectively promote line memorization, thereby facilitating inclusion in a self-chosen recreational activity for an adult with autism. The participant had previously demonstrated a skill deficit for memorizing a script for a theatrical performance, which was her preferred recreational activity. Although the SFP has been effectively used to teach various skills, previous research did not target self-chosen leisure skills or adult participants. Using a multiple-baseline-across-behaviors (scripts) design, the words of three scripts were taught and systematically faded. Following the SFP, the physical scripts were faded entirely. Through all steps of script fading, generalization, and maintenance, the participant successfully recited the script with nearly 100% accuracy. The SFP was effective in teaching the skill of memorizing lines and was the first to examine the effect of a behavior analytic approach on teaching a performing arts leisure skill.

Leisure skills and recreational activities are an essential component of independence and self-determination for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). Turygin and Matson (2014) refer to leisure skills as the skills needed to engage in activities that are not related to maintaining one’s living environment, job, or health. These skills involve the ability to identify, access, plan, and actively participate in recreational activities, defined as activities that one voluntarily engages in, mainly for enjoyment and satisfaction. In the context of skill acquisition, the targeted skills are leisure skills which in turn allow engagement or improve performance in recreational activities. For example, for an individual to play a preferred board game as a recreational activity that individual must first acquire the necessary leisure skills involved in playing that game. Some examples of recreational activities include crafts, photography, gardening, painting, dancing, listening to music, and acting. Participating in recreational activities is essential for a high quality of life for all, including individuals with IDD. Quality of life (QOL) is defined as “individual’s perception of their position in life in the context of the culture and value systems in which they live and in relation to their goals, expectations, standards and concerns” (World Health Organization, 1997, p. 3). Possessing the leisure skills to participate in recreational activities enhances daily enjoyment, provides access to reinforcers and creates opportunities for social interactions, all of which increases one’s QOL.

To promote a high QOL for adults with IDD, recreational activities should be selected by the individuals themselves rather than by clinicians, researchers, or policymakers (Pellicano et al., 2022). Once chosen, the necessary leisure skills for participating in the preferred recreational activities can then be taught. Baer et al. (1968) emphasized that behavior analysis should focus on socially significant behavior when evaluating a study, as outlined in the seven dimensions of behavior analysis. Therefore, applied behavior analysis (ABA), by involving both direct and indirect consumers in identifying socially significant goals, can ultimately contribute to an improved QOL (Schwartz & Kelly, 2021). Enhancing QOL is the most critical outcome for our learners, and only the learners themselves can determine which goals are socially significant to them. It is imperative that individuals have self-determination—the right to make decisions about their own lives (Wehmeyer & Garner, 2003).

Acquiring preferred leisure skills also presents opportunities for individuals to access inclusive settings and be further integrated into their community. Research has shown numerous positive outcomes for inclusive environments, yet the exact measures and methods for achieving this inclusion are debated (Amado et al., 2013). One domain in which research on inclusion is particularly scarce is the performing arts. A survey of the Screen Actors Guild (Raynor & Hayward, 2009) revealed that, of 110,000 total members, just 1,237 identified as having a disability. If an individual with IDD desires to pursue the performing arts, as was the case for the participant of the current study, it follows that they might seek performing arts skill training for adults with IDD, and to date no ABA research has targeted these skills. Conducting applied research in this area has the potential to pave the way for the inclusion of artists with disabilities in the theatre, film, and television that influence culture on a grand scale, but it begins with those artists acquiring the requisite skills needed for that inclusion to be meaningful.

Though the research on leisure skills acquisition for children with IDD is abundant, very little research has evaluated the effectiveness of leisure skills training in adults with IDD (Manente et al., 2022). The few studies that have targeted leisure skills in adults with IDD primarily focused on the skills required to initiate engagement in recreational activities (Schleien et al., 1981a), or on the social skills required for participation (O’Reilly et al., 2000), but both examples fall short of addressing the acquisition and improvement of leisure skills related to a particular recreational activity. Lagomarcino et al. (1984) and Schleien et al. (1981b) conducted studies aimed at teaching leisure skills to adults with IDD—a dance skill and a darts game, respectively—through a systematic training approach. However, in the forty years since these studies were published, this area of research has been largely neglected. Those studies identified did not utilize strategies that would be appropriate for teaching the target skill of the present study, line memorization, nor did they address the lack of inclusion of adults with IDD in theatre or film.

Scripts have been used as prompts or cues to teach individuals with autism conversational skills (e.g., Sarokoff et al., 2001). The script fading procedure (SFP), a term coined by Akers et al. (2016), advances this method by systematically removing or fading the script from back to front until all the words of the script are removed and the individual continues to emit the scripted words in the absence of the physical script. Script fading was first developed by Krantz and McClannahan (1993), who used the procedure to teach four children with autism to initiate social exchanges with their peers. Although the authors successfully used the SFP to teach social initiations, the participants never engaged in an actual conversation. In 2001, Sarokoff, et al. contributed to research advancement by implementing the SFP to teach three conversations to two children with autism. The authors used a written script with embedded textual stimuli in which the first word of each script was the embedded item (i.e., food item or a video game package). The word/s on the item served as the first word/s of the first line of the textual script. Once both participants mastered reading the script, the two participants were brought together to read their written scripts as a conversation. Subsequently, all words were faded from back to front using a five-step SFP, until only the candy or game package remained. Following the SFP, with no script and only the presence of the candy or video game as a stimulus, the children engaged in scripted and unscripted conversations at levels above baseline.

Research into using the SFP to teach conversations continued to add to previous knowledge when Brown et al. (2008) used the SFP to teach children with autism to initiate conversational interactions in retail stores. Ledbetter-Cho et al. (2015) focused on peer-to-peer communication among three young boys with autism, achieving increased non-scripted initiations and responses. Similarly, De Matos et al. (2019) successfully taught conversational skills to an individual using the SFP, transitioning from zero rates of initiation and responding during baseline to mastering scripted initiations and achieving generalization across various partners and contexts.

Present Study

In reviewing the available literature, the authors were not able to identify any study that targeted line memorization as a leisure skill in adults with IDD. A 2002 review of research on theatrical skill acquisition among professional performers (Noice & Noice, 2002) revealed that relatively few researchers have examined script memorization from an experimental approach. Consequently, the authors of the current study aimed to fill this research gap by applying the SFP to teach script memorization to an adult woman with autism as a leisure skill required to participate in a recreational theatre activity. The SFP was chosen as the instructional procedure because it has been effectively used in previous studies to teach conversational speech to individuals with autism. The goal of this study was to determine whether the SFP could effectively promote line memorization, thereby facilitating inclusion in a self-selected recreational activity for an adult with autism. This study also sought to extend research on the effectiveness of the SFP to teaching adults with autism, as previous studies have not involved adult participants.

Method

Participant

The participant was Juliet, a white, Jewish, 31-year-old woman with autism and intellectual disability who received residential and day program services from a community support organization. Access to demographic and educational information was limited due to the nature of the community setting. It was observed that she had high verbal skills relative to her diagnoses. Socially, she was proficient in initiating conversational exchanges and other typical social interactions. Juliet attended a recreational theatre class in which clients were taught theatre skills and had the opportunity to perform in theatrical productions. A pre-requisite skill for the theatre class was a literacy level that matched the scripts used in performances.

Prior to participating in this study, Juliet had the opportunity to audition, rehearse, and perform in three theatrical productions directed by the first author. Each production rehearsed once weekly for approximately 1 year before performing in front of a live audience. Juliet independently auditioned consistently for each of the three productions, demonstrating a strong desire to participate in these live performances. Throughout the rehearsal process for each show, Juliet was given a script with lines to memorize, and though she was able to read and recite the lines while holding the physical script, she was unable to recite the lines from memory. Over the 3 years that Juliet auditioned for the performances, she never demonstrated the ability to memorize even a single line of five words. To recite lines successfully during rehearsals and live performances, Juliet required a point-to-point verbal model from the instructor. This limited her participation to repeating a single line in each performance.

Despite this performance issue, Juliet continued to participate in the theatre program. Although there were other activities available to her, she remained committed to the theatre activity. She had a strong desire to perform in live productions and increase her skills as a stage performer, and she reported frustration to the first author that she could not manage to memorize the lines without a verbal or textual prompt. During the IRB-compliant recruitment process, all members of the theatre group were informed about the purpose of the study and invited to express their interest if memorizing lines was a skill they wanted to learn. Juliet volunteered, confirming the personal social validity that this goal held for her.

Setting

Sessions took place in a room at the day program facility and included all phases: baseline, pre-reading, Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and maintenance. The room contained a large table and three chairs, and the only individuals present were the participant, the experimenter, and the staff member reading the cue lines. Generalization probes were conducted in a larger room at the same facility where performances typically take place. This room had a larger number of tables and chairs, a higher ceiling, and circular walls.

Materials

Three dramatic scripts, defined here as a contrived conversational exchange between two or more individuals to be performed for an audience, were used in this procedure. The dramatic scripts were created by the first author, and the physical scripts were printed on white paper in black ink (see Appendices A, B, & C). Each dramatic script was a different conversation between two characters, with each character speaking three alternating lines containing five words. The lines that the participant was attempting to memorize were referred to as the target lines, and the lines spoken by the staff member were referred to as the cue lines. Both sets of lines were printed on each script. Each cue line was spoken before a target line and functioned as the discriminative stimulus for Juliet to vocally recite her target lines. The scripts were labeled Script A, Script B, and Script C.

Dependent Variable

The dependent variable in this study was the correctly recited scripted word. This was defined as a vocal recitation of each word of the target line delivered after the correct cue line. To be scored as a correct response, the target words of the dramatic script had to be recited verbatim, in the correct order, and within 10 s of the cue line delivery.

Measurement

Frequency data were collected on the correct recitation of each word in the target line, referred to as target words. Each script contained three target lines containing five target words for a total of fifteen target words per script. To be scored as correct, the target words also had to be recited in the correct order and within 10 s of the cue line delivery. If an incorrect word was recited, no verbal or written prompts were delivered. The remainder of that line was scored as incorrect, and the next cue line was delivered. Trials were ended upon attempted recitation of all three lines, or if Juliet did not respond for 10 s or verbally said, “I don’t know.” Data were collected in semi-weekly sessions over a period of five months.

Procedure

Experimental Design

A concurrent multiple-baseline-across-behaviors (dramatic scripts) design was used. For each dramatic script reading, the character who initiated the exchange was read by a staff member, and Juliet read the lines of the character speaking second. For example, in Script A, the staff member said, “Good morning, how are you?” and the participant responded, “I am well, thank you,” and so on. This allowed for data to be collected only on the skill of memorizing lines, without the added skill of initiating a conversation. After Script A met criteria to enter Phase 2, Script B entered Phase 1. After Script B met criteria to enter Phase 2, script C entered Phase 1. Refer to Fig. 1 for a visual reference of the process for each script to enter the next phase of the study.

Fig. 1.

Flowchart of experimental procedure. Note. The black arrows indicate that the preceding script met criteria for advancement to the next phase. When Script A advanced to Phase 2, Script B entered Phase 1. When Script B advanced to Phase 2, Script C entered Phase 1. After entering Phase 1, each script continued to advance independently of the other scripts by meeting criteria. The abbreviation “Gen.” indicates the generalization probes

Pre-Reading

Prior to baseline, Juliet read through each script one time aloud with the experimenter. This was necessary so that the data collected in the remainder of the study would reflect how many of the words she had memorized from her initial reading of the script. No data were collected during the pre-reading phase. For the remainder of the experiment, the scripts were not reviewed in any other phase, with one exception. As a result of the participant’s absence due to illness, Script B was returned to pre-reading for a single session between sessions 15 and 16 in which she was able to read through the entire text for a single session with none of the words faded.

Baseline

After pre-reading, the physical scripts were removed, and Juliet was evaluated on her ability to memorize the target lines with no intervention. Beginning with Script A, the staff member recited the first cue line. If she said any of the words of the target line correctly, the staff member proceeded with the next cue line. If Juliet did not respond within 10 s or verbally stated that she did not remember the line, the trial was ended. The staff member repeated the procedure with Script B and Script C.

Phase 1: Reading Dramatic Scripts

Following baseline, Script A entered Phase 1 of the intervention. In Phase 1, the physical script was returned to Juliet, and she was asked again to read through the script in a manner identical to the pre-reading phase. The discriminative stimulus to recite each line of the script was the delivery of the cue line by the staff member. When Juliet successfully read 100% of the target words correctly for two consecutive sessions, the SFP was implemented for Script A, while Script B and Script C remained in baseline.

Phase 2: Script Fading Procedure

The SFP was implemented in five steps. For each step, one word of each target line was removed from the end of the sentence to the beginning of the sentence. When Step 1 of the SFP was implemented for Script A, that script was returned to Juliet with the last word of each target line removed. She was asked to read Script A and complete each target line by reciting the entire sentence including the faded word. After she recited all three of the target lines to criteria in Script A for two consecutive sessions, Step 2 of the SFP began in Script A by fading the second to last word in each target line. Each script entered the next step of the SFP when Juliet met the criteria for advancement, which was reciting at least 14 of the target words of that script correctly for two consecutive sessions, regardless of the number of words that had been faded.

Phase 3: Discriminative Stimulus Fading

After all the words of Juliet’s target lines had been faded, and Juliet recited at least 14 target words correctly for two consecutive sessions, the cue lines for that script were faded in two steps. During Step 1 of this Discriminative Stimulus Fading Phase (Phase 3), the participant was handed a blank piece of paper. This removed the visual discriminative stimuli of the written cue lines. The discriminative stimulus to recite each target line correctly then became the auditory delivery of the cue line by the staff member, but Juliet was still holding the blank piece of paper to represent the dramatic script. When the participant correctly recited at least 14 target words of each script for two consecutive sessions, Step 2 of Phase 3 was implemented for that script, in which the blank piece of paper was also removed, and the participant was asked to recite her lines correctly with only the auditory cue line serving as the discriminative stimulus.

Generalization/Maintenance

Probes were conducted to assess for two types of generalization. First, the participant was brought into the larger performance room at the facility to recite her lines, while standing in a setting more appropriate to the task. The physical script was not returned to her. Instead, the staff member initiated each scripted dramatic performance with the cue lines serving as the discriminative stimulus for Juliet to recite her lines of that script. In addition, to assess for generalization to a different scene partner, the cue lines were read in the original room by a staff member who was not the same as the one who had read the cue lines during all initial phases of the study. No additional staff or participants were in the room observing the sessions.

Two maintenance probes were conducted for Script A by moving the performance of that script to a bi-weekly schedule for the final weeks of the study. These sessions were conducted in the original room where initial phases were conducted. Owing to time constraints, only one maintenance probe was conducted for Script B and Script C two weeks after the last generalization probe by having Juliet recite the dramatic scripts one final time.

Interobserver Agreement

Interobserver agreement (IOA) data were collected by a staff member at the day program during 25% of the sessions from baseline through Phase 3 of the study. An agreement was scored when both the observer and the experimenter scored a target word recited by Juliet as a match showing agreement on a correct or incorrect response. A disagreement was scored when there was a discrepancy between the observer and experimenter in the scoring of a response as correct or incorrect. IOA was calculated by dividing the number of agreements by the total number of agreements plus disagreements and multiplying by 100. The mean IOA was 98.8% with a range of 93% to 100% agreement.

Results

Figure 2 shows the number of target words that Juliet correctly recited from memory for each dramatic script. During baseline, Juliet did appear to recall some target words after only reading through each script one time in the pre-reading phase. During the first baseline session she was able to recall five target words of Script A, followed by a descending trend of recalling zero to two target words during Sessions 2 through 6. During baseline for Script B, Juliet recalled a range of zero to three target words of the 15-word script, with zero words recalled for the last five sessions of baseline. For Script C, she recalled zero to one target word/s of the 15-word script during the 12 sessions of baseline. As baseline continued, it became clear that she had not retained the scripts word for word.

Fig. 2.

Number of words Juliet recited correctly in each session. Note. The arrows marked with numbers represent the various steps of Phase 2: Script Fading and Phase 3: Discriminative Stimulus Fading. The arrows marked with X indicate the interruption in data collection due to illness. The arrow marked R indicates the reintroduction of pre-reading in which Script B was reviewed a single time before continuing with the SFP. The phase labeled “Gen.” represents the generalization probes

In Phase 1, the dramatic scripts were returned to Juliet until she read that script with 100% accuracy for two consecutive sessions. For all three scripts, Juliet met the criteria for Phase 1 in two sessions. Once that criterion was met for a script, Phase 2 (SFP) was implemented, first for Script A, followed by Scripts B and C, after showing experimental control using a multiple-baseline design. The criteria for advancement to the next step of the SFP for each script was at least 14 target words correctly recited for two consecutive sessions. During the SFP, Juliet continued to recite at least 14 of the 15 target words correctly for all scripts. The SFP was introduced in Session 7 for Script A, Session 10 for Script B, and Session 13 for Script C. For Script A, the SFP was implemented in five steps from Sessions 7–18. For Script B, the SFP was implemented in five steps from Sessions 10–24. For Script C the SFP was implemented in five steps from Sessions 14–24.

In Step 1 of Phase 3 (Discriminative Stimulus Fading), Juliet recited all three scripts with 100% accuracy for two consecutive sessions after the cue lines were removed. This met the criteria for advancement to Step 2, where all visual discriminative stimuli were eliminated by completely removing the physical script. She repeated this progress during Step 2, again reciting all three scripts with 100% accuracy for the last two sessions. Only with the first session of Step 2 with Script A did she miss a single word, but she proceeded to correct that mistake for the next two sessions.

Generalization probes began after Phase 3 of the study was completed. Juliet responded with 100% accuracy for each of the two generalization probes in each of the three dramatic scripts. Maintenance probes were conducted on a bi-weekly basis following completion of the study. Juliet maintained 100% accuracy reciting her lines for all three dramatic scripts with two maintenance probes recorded for Script A, and one maintenance probe recorded for Scripts B and C.

It should be noted that between Sessions 11 and 12, Juliet became ill resulting in an interruption in data collection. When returning from her illness during Session 12, she consistently missed one or two words of Script B for the next few sessions. She did substitute appropriate word/s; however, generalization of the words was not a goal of this study, as dramatic scripts require memorization of the actual scripted words. Therefore, Script B was returned to pre-reading for a single session (marked with an R on the graph) between Sessions 15 and 16 in which she was able to read through the entire text a single time with none of the words faded. After this singular return to pre-reading for Script B, she correctly recited 100% of the words for Script B during Step 1 of the SFP during Session 16, and for the rest of the study. For all three scripts, she maintained nearly 100% correct rates of responding throughout all script fading, prompt fading, generalization, and maintenance phases, and the percentage of non-overlapping data points between baseline and intervention was 100%.

Discussion

Juliet’s success in this study represents a significant step forward in her path toward self-determination by demonstrating that she can successfully learn a skill in her preferred area of leisure and recreation. This goal was socially significant for Juliet because she expressed a strong desire to participate in the staged performances produced by the day program, but her opportunities to do so were limited by her inability to memorize lines. Since she had previously been unable to memorize dramatic scripts when it was required of her for a performance, acquiring this skill granted her access to more performance opportunities. Prior to the study, Juliet reported feelings of frustration regarding her struggle with memorizing lines. As she made significant progress throughout the study, she continually remarked on how surprised she was by her success in memorizing more words from week to week as result of the SFP. As Juliet’s desired outcome was to gain the ability to memorize lines to participate in future performances, her QOL demonstrably improved.

This study successfully implemented the SFP to teach an adult with autism to memorize target scripted lines in three dramatic scripts. Moreover, Juliet generalized her ability to recite the target lines in all three dramatic scripts in a novel environment and with a novel scene partner in the absence of the physical script. She also maintained memorization of all three scripts with perfect accuracy for 2–4 weeks following the conclusion of the intervention. The success of the intervention marks the first time that the SFP has been used to teach a performing arts leisure skill to an adult with autism and extends the research by Sarokoff et al. (2001) by applying the SFP to a novel area of research and to adult participants. Memorizing lines is a fundamental skill needed for performing in any media including theatre, film, television, and radio. It could also be considered a cusp behavior for performing arts skills, as the ability to learn more varied and complex acting techniques is dependent on the actor first being able to memorize their lines.

The initial pre-reading phase served two purposes. First, it introduced the script once so that in subsequent phases, data could be collected on the skill of memorizing. Second, it ensured that all the words within the script were achievable for Juliet to read and speak. She demonstrated no vocabulary skill deficit and moved into the baseline phase. The few words that she recited correctly during baseline may have been due to the casual, conversational nature of the scripts. The first cue line of Script A, for example, was “Hello, how are you?” and Juliet’s first line in response was, “I am doing fine, thanks.” It is likely that, having just reviewed the scripts in pre-reading, she may have responded to the cue line with an appropriate intraverbal response based on a previous history of social interaction. Despite those few correct words, the baseline data showing a descending trend clearly indicated that moving to the SFP intervention was warranted.

After the intervention was interrupted briefly due to her illness, her progress for Scripts A and C remained stable. She recited all 15 target words of Script A correctly, despite two of the five words being faded prior to the interruption. However, because she consistently missed a few target words of Script B for several sessions in a row following her illness, the authors decided to return Script B to pre-reading to rehearse a single time. In the context of an actor rehearsing a script, it would be appropriate to review the script in this way.

Her progress during the SFP demonstrated that the procedure was effectively producing the desired outcome. Even when her correct rate of responding dipped below 100%, it was because she occasionally would substitute a synonym for the word she was attempting to recall, such as, “I am doing fine” instead of, “I am doing well.” For the purposes of an experimental study, those synonyms were recorded as incorrect responses, but in the context of an actor learning and performing a script, word substitutions such as these are common among even the most experienced professional performers, thus they do not detract from the success of Juliet’s progress.

Actors are expected to memorize and perform the script without the physical script in front of them. Phase 3: Discriminative Stimulus Fading was purposefully designed to resemble the rehearsal process in which an actor gradually stops reading from their physical script. The generalization and maintenance probes were similarly designed to represent recreational aspects of the performing arts. Actors are often required to perform the same script with a different scene partner or in a different location with no preparation, and often perform the same script for weeks or months. Here again Juliet demonstrated success in those skills; however, the absence of a generalization probe within the baseline phase presents a limitation to the conclusions of the data collected in the generalization probes after the intervention. Future studies should include generalization probes to further demonstrate successful generalization of this skill to novel settings and scene partners.

The primary limitation of this study was that data were only presented for one participant, although the authors were able to show experimental control through the use of a multiple-baseline design. Future studies should use two or more participants when researching the use of the SFP to teach memorization of dramatic scripts to individuals with autism or other developmental disabilities. Additionally, other studies might use the SFP to target social skills for adults with autism by using dramatic scripts to simulate social exchanges or to memorize longer scripted statements. Another limitation is the absence of data on treatment fidelity. The experimenter conducted each session in a nearly identical manner, by bringing the participant and staff member into the room, handing them the scripts, and then observing the reading and collecting data. To be thorough, future studies should include a treatment fidelity measure to collect accurate treatment fidelity data. Future studies may also find value in documenting measures for social validity, QOL, and learner preference through interviews, questionnaires, or other forms of self-reporting by the participants.

The number of targeted words in the present study was limited to five to match the participant’s skill level, and due to time limitations, the authors were not able to explore longer or more complex scripts with Juliet after she acquired the target skill of memorizing a short, simple script. Future studies aiming to explore the efficacy of the SFP for memorizing dramatic scripts should examine the outcome of attempting to memorize longer scripts with more complex language, more than two characters, or longer monologues with no scene partner. Though the current study examined script memorization as a leisure skill, the possibility for performing arts vocational skill training should also be explored. Further research aiming to teach performing arts vocational skills to adults with autism might include matching facial expressions, pace of speech, body language, and voice tone to portray specific characters. As more stories about disability are adapted for stage and screen, it is imperative to include artists with disabilities in the entertainment industry, which will begin with accessible vocational skill training for the performing arts. Inclusion in recreational and community settings should also be a goal of future research. Research in applied behavior analysis across all areas should also strive, as this study did, to center the preferences and goals of the individual learner. Just as Juliet dreams of being an actor, so does every person have the right to determine what QOL means to them and to be given the tools to fully integrate into meaningful settings.

Appendix A

Dramatic Script A

Character 1: Good morning, how are you?

Character 2: I am doing well, thanks.

Character 1: Do you have the time?

Character 2: Sorry, my watch is broken.

Character 1: That’s okay, see you later.

Character 2: Have a nice day, friend!

Appendix B

Dramatic Script B

Character 3: Have you seen my shoes?

Character 4: Yes, I threw them away.

Character 3: Why did you do that?

Character 4: They were old and ripped.

Character 3: Those were my only pair!

Character 4: You can buy new shoes.

Appendix C

Dramatic Script C

Character 5: Careful, a storm is coming.

Character 6: How bad will it be?

Character 5: The worst storm in years.

Character 6: I’m scared of loud thunder.

Character 5: You can stay with me.

Character 6: That would be great, thanks.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: Jason Gillis & Randi Sarokoff; Literature Review: Jason Gillis; Methodology: Jason Gillis & Randi Sarokoff; Formal analysis and investigation: Jason Gillis & Randi Sarokoff; Writing—original draft preparation: Jason Gillis & Randi Sarokoff; Writing – review and editing: [Jason Gillis & Randi Sarokoff.

Funding

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Data Availability

The authors confirm that all data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.

Declarations

Compliance with Ethical Standards

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Kean University as part of a Full review Application. The IRB approved the application prior to the start of this study.

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Participants signed an Informed Consent Form approved by Kean University’s IRB prior to the start of data collection that included permission to publish their data.

Author Note

This research was conducted to fulfill the thesis requirement of the first author's Master of Arts in Special Education: Applied Behavior Analysis and Autism Spectrum Disorders. We would like to thank Jespy House for permitting us to conduct this research at their performing arts site.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.