VISUAL IDENTITY MATCHING AND AUDITORY‐VISUAL MATCHING: A PROCEDURAL NOTE

Abstract

After preliminary computerized training on visual‐visual identity matching, a 5‐year‐old boy with autism (Sam) was given visual‐visual and auditory‐visual matching‐to‐sample tests with new stimuli. He did well in matching dictated name samples to 20 pictures, 26 printed upper case letters, and 9 single‐digit numbers. In matching the visual stimuli (pictures, letters, or numbers) to themselves, however, he did not perform well. We then increased the number of picture comparisons per trial from two to three. In tests after this three‐comparison training, Sam correctly matched on 95% of the original 20‐stimulus, four‐comparison, identity‐matching test trials. He went on to demonstrate accurate identity matching of the numbers, letters, and new pictures. In identity‐matching tests on the table top, he performed poorly until the stimulus array was made to resemble the stimulus arrangement on the computer. These findings showed that seemingly small procedural changes can influence performance and demonstrated that successful auditory‐visual matching does not guarantee proficiency in visual‐visual identity matching.