JCPSLP Vol 22 No 2 2020

name suggests, and that opportunities for likely benefits to child language development may be missed. An exploratory study by van Kleeck and Beckley-McCall (2002) examined parent–child SBR interactions with five families, each with two neurotypical different-aged preschoolers. Two conditions were observed: individual (parent–child dyads) and simultaneous reading (parent and both children). Parent behaviours during SBR (mediation strategies where guidance was provided while the child read) were coded according to a four-level coding scheme, and linguistic complexity of the text and time spent were recorded. Results indicated that book complexity, time spent and level of abstraction of parent utterances were all higher in the dyadic interactions with older children. The number of mediation strategies per minute and attempts to get and maintain attention (e.g., parent directing the child’s attention to the book, by saying “Look!”) were higher in dyadic interactions with the younger children. The simultaneous condition varied between families, with some parents showing a similar approach to the interaction with their older or younger child, while others used a combination of strategies. This suggests that the approach parents adopt during SBR is likely to differ between families. Previous studies of SBR have also revealed a relationship between a child’s reading skills and the type and frequency of feedback provided. For example, Tracey and Young (2002) analysed the SBR interactions of 76 third grade students and their parents. Findings indicated that children with poorer reading skills received more corrective feedback from their parents. In light of other research (Baker, Mackler, Sonnenschein, & Serpell, 2001), it is likely that an excess of corrective feedback may lead to a less enjoyable reading experience for the child. In addition, a gender pattern emerged: there were a greater number of verbal contributions in interactions between mothers and daughters than those between mothers and sons. This potentially places girls at an advantage in terms of benefiting from SBR in vocabulary, comprehension, oral language and syntactic development. Parent use of praise and error correction are therefore worthwhile avenues for investigation in SBR research in primary school age children with ASD. ASD and reading Within the ASD population there is a wide diversity of oral language abilities (Kjelgaard & Tager-Flusberg, 2001) and reading abilities (Bailey & Arciuli, 2020; Nation et al., 2006; Norbury & Nation, 2011). Some children with ASD present with weak oral language skills which puts them at risk of literacy difficulties (e.g., Bishop & Snowling, 2004; Clarke, Snowling, Truelove, & Hulme, 2010). In some cases, children may present with stronger decoding skills relative to their comprehension skills (Arciuli et al., 2013; Nation et al., 2006). In addition to oral language ability, poorer reading comprehension skills in children with ASD are also likely to be influenced by the social and communication challenges that characterise the condition (Ricketts, 2011). Despite the relatively high rate of literacy difficulties (between 7–10%; Lucas & Norbury, 2014) in children with ASD, little is known about the impact of different parental strategies on supporting and expanding their child’s literacy development through SBR interactions. This is especially the case in children of primary school age who have commenced formal reading instruction. Some recent studies have explored SBR with preschoolers with ASD. Tipton and colleagues (2017) investigated the nature of parent behaviours during an

adapted SBR activity with children with ASD in a clinic setting. Participants were 111 children (aged between 4 and 7 years 3 months) and their parents. Parent–child dyads were observed sharing four wordless books (selected to accommodate a range of child verbal and reading abilities), and parent feedback (comments/ questions) was coded and analysed for use of language elicitation strategies. These results were then compared with various developmental domains for each child based on standardised assessments: social skills, IQ, and behaviour. The authors found positive correlations between parent use of clarification techniques during SBR and a child’s social skills, and negative correlations between child IQ and amount of parent feedback during SBR (lower IQ was associated with greater parent feedback). Tipton et al. (2017) proposed a possible link between certain types of parent feedback and child social communication development, as well as a need for greater scaffolding investigating SBR practices between caregivers and their children, with a group of children with ASD as well as a neurotypical control group (aged between 3 and 5 years). The authors found that children on the autism spectrum presented with lower levels of passive engagement such as looking at the book, and higher levels of non-engaged behaviours (such as the child not attending to the book or exhibiting behaviour that impacts their ability to attend to reading) in comparison to the neurotypical group. Participants with ASD demonstrated the highest levels of joint engagement when reading familiar books. Westerveld et al. (2020) examined SBR interactions between 47 preschoolers (aged between 48 and 70 months) with ASD and their parents using two unfamiliar books. These authors extended the research base by analysing parent feedback and strategies used during SBR as well as child utterances. Findings suggested that parents used a range of print- and meaning-based feedback with their children, not favouring one approach over the other. Parents’ use of explicit teaching of story grammar and questioning was associated with greater verbal participation from the child. Although mostly involving preschool age participants, the studies described above indicate that SBR is an activity that families are likely already engaging in with their children, making it an ideal two-way avenue for a rich language exposure to take place. The results from these studies together support existing research that parents of children with ASD play a vital role in social, language, and literacy development. However, despite the recent research in SBR with this population, an area that remains largely unexplored is the way in which SBR might be similar or different for primary school aged children with ASD within the same family (e.g., siblings) in the home environment. Although there have been some recent studies of SBR in preschool children with ASD, a review of the literature revealed a dearth of evidence in the area in primary school aged children with ASD. While there has been some investigation of SBR interactions in families with neurotypical siblings (e.g., van Kleeck & Beckley-McCall, 2002) and with preschool children with ASD (Westerveld et al., 2020), as far as we are aware no previous study has examined the differences in SBR interactions between parent–child dyads that include primary school aged children who are siblings with ASD within the same family. during SBR for children with ASD and lower IQ. In 2018, Fleury and Hugh conducted a study

80

JCPSLP Volume 22, Number 2 2020

Journal of Clinical Practice in Speech-Language Pathology