OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
Journal of applied behavior analysis
01, 2020;53 (1): 493-507.

Effects of exposure to prompts on the acquisition of intraverbals in children with autism spectrum disorder.

Jessica C Kay, April N Kisamore, Jason C Vladescu, Tina M Sidener, Kenneth F Reeve, Catherine Taylor-Santa, Nicole A Pantano
Author Information
  1. Jessica C Kay: Caldwell University.
  2. April N Kisamore: Caldwell University.
  3. Jason C Vladescu: Caldwell University.
  4. Tina M Sidener: Caldwell University.
  5. Kenneth F Reeve: Caldwell University.
  6. Catherine Taylor-Santa: Caldwell University.
  7. Nicole A Pantano: Caldwell University.
PMID: 31297816 DOI: 10.1002/jaba.606

Abstract

The current experiment is a systematic replication of previous studies that evaluated the efficiency of echoic and tact prompts on the acquisition of intraverbals (i.e., French-to-English translations) following exposure to each prompt type. We extended these studies by (a) evaluating participants' language skills on standardized assessments, (b) incorporating descriptive praise for correct responding, (c) presenting trials via voice recording, and (d) evaluating teacher preference for each prompt type as a social validity measure. All participants learned at least one set of intraverbals faster with the procedure that was most recently used during teaching. These findings suggest that results from previous prompt comparison studies might be a function of previous exposure to prompt types and that it might be possible to manipulate learning histories such that a particular prompt type becomes more efficient.

Keywords

echoic prompts intraverbals learning history tact prompts

References

  1. Allan, A. C., Vladescu, J. C., Kisamore, A. N., Reeve, S. A., & Sidener, T. M. (2015). Evaluating the emergence of reverse intraverbals in children with autism. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 31, 59-75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40616-014-0025-8.
  2. Black, M. P., Skinner, C. H., Forbes, B. E., McCurdy, M., Coleman, M., Davis, K., & Gettelfinger, M. (2016). Cumulative instructional time and relative effectiveness conclusions: Extending research on response intervals, learning, and measurement scale. Behavior Analysis and Practice, 9, 58-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-016-0114-3.
  3. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
  4. Coon, J. T., & Miguel, C. F. (2012). The role of increased exposure to transfer-of-stimulus control procedures on the acquisition of intraverbal behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45, 657-666. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-657.
  5. DeLeon, I. G., & Iwata, B. A. (1996). Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 519-533. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1996.29-519.
  6. DeSouza, A. A., Fisher, W. W., & Rodriguez, N. M. (2019). Facilitating the emergence of convergent intraverbals in children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 52, 28-49. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.528.
  7. Dickes, N. R., & Kodak, T. (2015). Evaluating the emergence of reverse intraverbals following intraverbal training in young children with autism spectrum disorder. Behavioral Interventions, 30, 169-190. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.1412
  8. Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, D. M. (1997). Peabody picture vocabulary test (3rd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
  9. Eikeseth, S., & Smith, D. P. (2013). An analysis of verbal stimulus control in intraverbal behavior: implications for practice and applied research. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 29, 125-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03393130
  10. Finkel, A. S., & Williams, R. L. (2001). A comparison of textual and echoic prompts on the acquisition of intraverbal behavior in a six-year-old boy with autism. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 18, 61-70. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03392971.
  11. Fisher, W. W., Piazza, C. C., Bowman, L. G., & Amari, A. (1996). Integrating caregiver report with a systematic choice assessment. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 101, 15-25. Retrieved from. https://www.aaiddjournals.org/loi/ajmr.1.
  12. Gilliam, J. E. (2014). Gilliam autism rating scale (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: ProEd.
  13. Grannan, L., & Rehfeldt, R. A. (2012). Emergent intraverbal responses via tact and match-to-sample instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45, 601-605. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-601.
  14. Haggar, J., Ingvarsson, E. T., & Braun, E. C. (2018). Further evaluation of blocked trials to teach intraverbal responses under complex stimulus control: Effects of criterion-level probes. Learning and Motivation, 62, 29-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2017.02.0060023-9690.
  15. Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
  16. Horne, P. J., & Lowe, C. F. (1996). On the origins of naming and other symbolic behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 185-241. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1996.65-185.
  17. Ingvarsson, E. T., & Hollobaugh, T. (2011). A comparison of prompting tactics to establish intraverbals in children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44, 659-664. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2011.44-659.
  18. Ingvarsson, E. T., Kramer, R. L., Carp, C. L., Petursdottir, A. I., & Macias, H. (2016). Evaluation of a blocked-trials procedure to establish complex stimulus control over intraverbal responses in children with autism. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 32, 205-224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40616-016-0071-5.
  19. Ingvarsson, E. T., & Le, D. D. (2011). Further evaluation of prompting tactics for establishing intraverbal responding in children with autism. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 27, 75-93. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03393093.
  20. Ingvarsson, E. T., Tiger, J. H., Hanley, G. P., & Stephenson, K. M. (2007). An evaluation of intraverbal training to generate socially appropriate responses to novel questions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 411-429. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2007.40-411.
  21. Johns, J. L. (1970). The Dolch basic word list - then and now. Journal of Reading Behavior, 5, 35-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862967009546963.
  22. Kisamore, A. N., Karsten, A. M., & Mann, C. C. (2016). Teaching multiply controlled intraverbals to children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49, 826-847. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.344.
  23. Kodak, T., Campbell, V., Bergman, S., LeBlanc, B., Kurtz-Nelson, E., Cariveau, T., … Mahon, J. (2016). Examination of efficacious, efficient, and socially valid error-correction procedures to teach sight words and prepositions to children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.310.
  24. Kodak, T., Fuchtman, R., & Paden, A. (2012). A comparison of intraverbal training procedures for children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45, 155-160. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-155.
  25. Leaf, R., & McEachin, J. (1999). A work in progress: Behavior management strategies and a curriculum for intensive behavioral treatment of autism. New York: DRL Books.
  26. Lovaas, O. I., Koegel, R. L., & Schreibman, L. (1979). Stimulus overselectivity in autism: A review of research. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 1236-1254. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.86.6.1236.
  27. Palmer, D. C. (2016). On intraverbal control. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 32, 96-106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40616-016-0061-7.
  28. Peterson, S. P., Rodriguez, N. M., & Pawich, T. L. (2019). Effects of modeling rote versus varied responses on response variability and skill acquisition during discrete-trial instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 52, 370-385. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.528.
  29. Polick, A. S., Carr, J. E., & Hanney, N. M. (2012). A comparison of general and descriptive praise in teaching intraverbal behavior to children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45, 593-599. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-593.
  30. Rincover, A., & Koegel, R. L. (1975). Setting generality and stimulus control in autistic children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 8, 235-246. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1975.8-235.
  31. Roncati, A. L., Souza, A. C., & Miguel, C. F. (2019). Exposure to a specific prompt topography predicts its relative efficiency when teaching intraverbal behavior to children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 52(3), 739-745. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.568.
  32. Seaver, J. L., & Bourret, J. C. (2014). An evaluation of response prompts for teaching behavior chains. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 47, 777-792. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.159.
  33. Sindelar, P. T., Rosenberg, M. S., & Wilson, R. J. (1985). An adapted alternating treatments design for instructional research. Education and Treatment of Children, 8(1), 67-76. Retrieved from. http://www.educationandtreatmentofchildren.net/.
  34. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
  35. Stevens, C., Sidener, T. M., Reeve, S. A., & Sidener, D. W. (2011). Effects of behavior-specific and general praise on acquisition of tacts in children with pervasive developmental disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 5, 666-669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2010.08.003.
  36. Stokes, T. F., & Baer, D. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 349-367. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1977.10-349.
  37. Sundberg, M. L. (2008). Verbal behavior milestone assessment and placement program: The VB-MAPP. Concord, CA: ABV Press.
  38. Sundberg, M. L., & Sundberg, C. A. (2011). Intraverbal behavior and verbal conditional discriminations in typically developing children and children with autism. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 27, 23-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03393090.
  39. Valentino, A. L., Shillingsburg, M. A., & Call, N. A. (2012). Comparing the effects of echoic prompts and echoic prompts plus modeled prompts on intraverbal behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45, 431-435. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-431.
  40. Vedora, J., & Conant, E. (2015). A comparison of prompting tactics for teaching intraverbals to young adults with autism. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 31, 267-276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40616-015-0030-6.
  41. Vedora, J., Meunier, L., & Mackay, H. (2009). Teaching intraverbal behavior to children with autism: A comparison of textual and echoic prompts. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 25, 79-86. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03393072.
  42. Williams, K. T. (2007). Expressive vocabulary test (2nd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: AGS Publishing.
  43. Yaw, J., Skinner, C. H., Skinner, A. L., Maurer, K., Cihak, D., Wilhoit, B., … Booher, J. (2014). Measurement scale influences in the evaluation of sight-word reading interventions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 47, 360-379. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.126.

MeSH Term

Autism Spectrum Disorder
Child
Child, Preschool
Educational Personnel
Humans
Language
Learning
Male
Voice
Journal Article

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0promptpromptsintraverbalspreviousstudiesexposuretypeechoictactacquisitionevaluatingmightlearningcurrentexperimentsystematicreplicationevaluatedefficiencyieFrench-to-Englishtranslationsfollowingextendedparticipants'languageskillsstandardizedassessmentsbincorporatingdescriptivepraisecorrectrespondingcpresentingtrialsviavoicerecordingdteacherpreferencesocialvaliditymeasureparticipantslearnedleastonesetfasterprocedurerecentlyusedteachingfindingssuggestresultscomparisonfunctiontypespossiblemanipulatehistoriesparticularbecomesefficientEffectschildrenautismspectrumdisorderhistory

Similar Articles

Cited By (4)