subjects. However, the setting was more contrived and it was not based on the interests of the child. In addition, many studies mentioned that it is beneficial for the child to initiate, but it becomes challenging to use incidental teaching past a certain age because then the interests start to become narrower and more depleted.

It is also difficult to find a “perfect” intervention for ASD because it is a spectrum disorder, so the signs and symptoms vary among children. Therefore, each child is at a different level of severity, and each level of severity needs more or less assistance. It is going to be easier for high functioning children with ASD to learn how to have verbal communication that is socially functional than it would be for lower functioning children with ASD. It is also dependent upon the parents and the services of the child that determines the success of an intervention. Some parents do not have as much time to practice instructional teaching at home, so the procedure may only be done once or twice a week with therapy appointments. For example, McGee et al. (1999) had a home-based component in their study where to parents did an addition ten hours a week of teaching with their child, so that is also a contributing factor to the children’s progress. In addition, if a child does not have therapists that are educated adequately for the procedure, then the child will not have as much progress. This procedure, like many others in the field of ASD, is very dependent on outside factors to make it successful.

Overall, incidental teaching has many more benefits than limitations. It is a procedure that motivates the children and is an intervention that has a low probability of prompt dependency, which can be dangerous in interventions. The main component of incidental teaching that also makes it notable is that it has evidence to support the generalization across settings and people without prompts because those two components tend to be challenging among other interventions (McGee et al., 1999).