The AIT Institute is the most comprehensive
Berard AIT resource website for parents.

Auditory Integration Training is an educational
intervention.

Berard AIT is an auditory intervention that consists of
10 hours (20 sessions) over 10 or 12 consecutive days, under the supervision of professionally trained AIT Practitioners who follow the Berard AIT protocol.

AIT Session prices in the USA range from about $1,200 to 2,000. Prices internationally will vary by country.

The minimum recommended age for AIT is 3 years of age.

Berard AIT is a sound therapy with many scientific studies.

All information provided here is for educational purposes.

Resource Sites

Detox My Child

Homeopathy For Special Needs Children

Homeopathy For Women

Homeopathic Constitution

Sensory Processing Disorder (SPD) Resoures

What's Your Homeopathic Constitution? Take On-Line Survey

Autism Study 2002: Auditory Integration Training (AIT) and It's Effectiveness with Autism (ASD)

by Rosalie Seymour, Speech Therapist and Audiologist, AIT Practitioner and Maoilíosa Ó Rathaille, B.A., M.Sc., C.Stat., Lecturer in Mathematics and Statistics, Waterford Institute of Technology

"The results of this study indicate that a course of AIT is likely to have significant beneficial effects for children with a diagnosis of autism. These results are compatible with many other studies into the effects of AIT on Children with Autism."

Two groups of children with autism were studied; a control group (n = 8) and an experimental group (n = 15).

The control group was made up of children who had a diagnosis of autism, who did not receive AIT. The experimental group were made up of a comparable group of children with a diagnosis of autism who did receive AIT.

The two methods of assessment for comparison chosen were the Autism Treatment Evaluation Checklist (ATEC) of Drs Rimland and Edelson, and the Autism Behavior Checklist (ABC) of Anand and Singh.

The ATEC gives a Total score, as well as sub scores for

Speech,
Sociability,
Cognitive / Sensory awareness, and
Health-Physical-Behavioural issues.

The ABC has a Total score, as well as subscores for

Hyperactivity,
Irritability,
Lethargy,
Stereotypy and
Inappropriate Speech

In both these checklists, a high score indicates greater severity while a low score indicates a milder degree of difficulty.

COMPARING THE TWO GROUPS PRE-AIT:

In this section (see Figures 1-4 and Tables 1-4 below), the two groups are compared to discover whether they were evenly comparable.

The results show that they were found to be very similar in terms of age and E2 diagnostic scores at the commencement of the trial period.

(NOTE ON READING BOXPLOTS: each of the four sections indicates 25% of the sample. The boxed two middle sections each represent the 25% nearest the midline, and the lines each represent 25% on the outer ends of the sample. A star indicates an out-lier).

Figure 1: Age

Figure 2: Diagnosis

Table 2: Comparison of E2 Total

E2 total	Control	Experimental	Mean difference	-0.5
Sample size	7	14	t-value	-0.1
Mean	-7.3	-6.79	P-value	0.92
Standard deviation	14.8	7.91	Significant (5%)	No

Figure 3: E2 Subscore Speech

Table 3: Comparison of E2 Speech

E2 speech	Control	Experimental	Mean difference	0.21
Sample size	7	14	t-value	0.17
Mean	1.43	1.21	P-value	0.868
Standard deviation	3.46	2.36	Significant (5%)	No

Figure 4: E2 Subscore Behavior

Table 4: Comparison of E2 Behavior

E2 Behavior	Control	Experimental	Mean difference	-0.71
Sample size	7	14	t-value	-0.17
Mean	-8.7	-8.0	P-value	0.867
Standard deviation	12.6	6.97	Significant (5%)	No

So it can be seen that the Experimental Group and the Control Group were comparable in terms of age and diagnostic severity as measured by the form E2.

COMPARISON OF THE GROUPS – ATEC AND ABC BASELINE SCORES

In addition, both groups started from the same baseline scores in terms of ATEC and ABC scores. As can be seen in Figures 5 and 6 and in Tables 5 and 6 below, there is no statistical evidence of any differences between the groups for both the initial ATEC total scores and the initial ABC total scores.

Figure 5:ATEC

Table 5: Comparison of ATEC initial scores

ATEC initial	Control	Experimental
Sample size	8	15	W-value	79.5
Median	54.5	80.0	P-value	0.3017
Difference between medians	-12.5		Significant (5%)	No

Figure 6: ABC

Table 6: Comparison of ABC initial scores

ABC initial	Control	Experimental
Sample size	8	15	W-value	78.0
Median	17.0	29.0	P-value	0.2583
Difference between medians	-8.0		Significant (5%)	No

THE INTERVENTION

Each of the children assigned to the experimental group (n= 15) received a ten-day course of Auditory Integration Training (AIT) over a period of 5 months. The AIT was performed by a certificated AIT practitioner and trainer in the method, using an Audiokinetron.

No extra filters were set as none of the participants were able to complete the Bérard Listening Tests. The Bérard Protocol for administration of AIT was followed for each of the participants. Outside of AIT, the participants continued with their regular programs.

The children of the control group continued with their regular programs, but did not receive any specific music nor listening training during this period.

The post-AIT checklist scores were taken from forms completed 4 months after AIT was done for each child, and 4 months after the initial pre-checklists were completed in the case of the control group.

RESULT OF PRE-POST SCORE CHANGES COMPARISON

In comparing the changes in the ATEC scores and the ABC scores for the two groups, after the experimental period, the statistical evidence suggests that the there is a significant difference for the ATEC scores (see Figure 7 and Table 7) and an almost significant difference for the ABC scores (see Figure 8 and Table 8), with the experimental group showing more benefit in both cases. These changes being significant were probably due to AIT, and cannot be attributed to chance.

Figure 7:ATEC pre-post scores differences

Table 7: Comparison of ATEC pre-post score differences

ATEC differences	Control	Experimental	Mean difference	-10.3
Sample size	6	15	t-value	-2.16
Mean	5.7	16.0	P-value	0.044
Standard deviation	10.3	9.79	Significant (5%)	Yes

Figure 8: ABC pre-post score differences

Table 8: Comparison of ABC pre-post score differences

ABC differences	Control	Experimental	Mean difference	-8.07
Sample size	6	14	t-value	-2.03
Mean	0.0	8.07	P-value	0.058
Standard deviation	5.62	8.94	Significant (5%)	No

CONCLUSION

These results indicate that a course of Auditory Integration Training (AIT) resulted in some significant improvements for a group of children with autism. These changes were not observed in the comparable group of children with autism who did not receive AIT.

These changes were more significant for those behaviors measured by the Autism Treatment Evaluation Checklist (ATEC), which has subscores for

Speech,

Sociability,

Cognitive / Sensory awareness

Health-Physical-Behavioral issues.

The results of this study indicate that a course of AIT is likely to have significant beneficial effects for children with a diagnosis of autism. These results are compatible with many other studies into the effects of AIT on Children with Autism.

References available on request from the author.

PARENT QUICK LINKS

AIT CHECKLIST!

Watch AIT Videos!

About Berard AIT

About AIT: Podcasts

AIT FAQ's

AIT Practitioners List

AIT Sessions - Global

AIT Sessions - USA

Audio Tests for AIT

Benefits of AIT