Auditory Integration Training and Autism Ranking: Insufficient/Mixed evidence

Current Research

We have identified thirteen scientific studies of auditory integration training for autistic people which have been published in English-speaking, peer-reviewed journals. *

Seven of these studies used a group design, comparing a group of autistic children receiving AIT to a different group receiving something else or not receiving an intervention at all.  Six of these studies used a single-case design (where there was no group receiving something else).

The majority of the studies followed the timing in the original protocol suggested by Berard, that is a total of 20 sessions, split over 10 days, with two sessions per day, each lasting 30 minutes or so. However, in one study Neysmith-Roy (2001), this protocol was repeated every three to eight weeks over the course of a whole year.

Tomatis method

We have identified four studies of the Tomatis method, which included 62 individuals aged 4 to 11 years.  

  • Al-Ayadhi et al (2013) reported that the “Tomatis method can reduce autistic symptoms, increase social interaction, communication, and reduce stereotypical movements, and can be used as an effective treatment for autistic children.”
  • Corbett et al (2008) reported no improvement in receptive and expressive language in autistic children.
  • Gerritsen 2000) reported that “The benefits from the Tomatis Therapy varied from subject to subject. In this study, one subject transitioned from nonverbal to verbal, one began to spontaneously repeat words, and others increased their receptive and expressive vocabulary. Additional findings included improvements in skills of daily living, motor skills, socialization, and overall communication skills.”
  • Neysmith-Roy (2001) reported improvement in behaviour and prelinguistic behaviors in some of the participants.

Bérard Method

We have identified nine studies of the Bérard Method, which included more than 200 individuals aged 3 to 39 years. 

The results indicated that although the majority of the children demonstrated general improvement in language over the course of the studies, these improvements did not necessarily appear to be related to the treatment.

  • Five of the studies reported improvements in the AIT group, with no significant adverse reported. For example, Al-Ayahdi et al (2013) reported “ASD subject showed 22% and 26% percentage improvement in SRS scoring 3 and 6 months respectively following the AIT intervention. Those changes were attributed to statistically significant changes in social awareness, social cognition, and social communication.”
  • Four of the studies reported no significant improvements compared to control groups. For example, Corbett et al (2008) reported “The results indicated that although the majority of the children demonstrated general improvement in language over the course of the study, it did not appear to be related to the treatment condition.”

Other methods

We have been unable to identify any scientific studies of the other forms of AIT, such as SAMONAS therapy, used with autistic people published in peer reviewed journals.


*Please note: We have not included articles with fewer than three autistic participants, articles which did not examine the efficacy of auditory integration for autistic people or articles on the Listening Program. We have not included the latter as it differs considerably from the other forms of auditory integration training in terms of theory and delivery.

16 Jun 2022
Last Review
01 Jul 2019
Next Review
01 Nov 2024