|
| International Symposium - Stimulus Control and Verbal Behavior |
| Sunday, May 28, 2006 |
| 3:00 PM–4:20 PM |
| International Ballroom South |
| Area: EAB; Domain: Basic Research |
| Chair: Caio F. Miguel (New England Center for Children) |
| Discussant: Martha Hübner (USP Sao Paulo, Brazil) |
| CE Instructor: Caio F. Miguel, Ph.D. |
| Abstract: Verbal behavior and stimulus control have evolved as separate areas within behavior analysis. However, attempts have been made to combine research traditions from these two areas in order to explain and teach complex behavior. Braga-Kenyon et. al. investigated whether defined responses can be included in equivalence relations. The results so far suggest that defined responses, along with the stimulus members of an analytic unit, participate in the equivalence relation. Andrade et al. compared the effectiveness of two teaching procedures to establish auditory-visual discrimination; progressive delay of point prompts and no-delay. Results suggest, so far, that prompt delay is a more effective way to teach conditional discriminations. Such results raise questions regarding the behavioral events that take place during the delay of the prompt. Perez-Gonzales et al., investigated whether teaching operants with the same response form as the intraverbal targeted to emerge would facilitate emergence. Results suggest that teaching tacts and intraverbals with the same response as the probed intraverbals facilitates the emergence of intraverbals. |
| |
| Inclusion of Defined Responses in Equivalence Relations: A Systematic Replication of Manabe et al. (1995). |
| PAULA RIBEIRO BRAGA-KENYON (New England Center for Children), Maria Andrade (New England Center for Children), William H. Ahearn (New England Center for Children), Murray Sidman (N/a) |
| Abstract: The present study, with human subjects, provided systematic replication of a study reported by Manabe, Kawashima, and Staddon (1995), with budgerigars as subjects. In Experiment I, five adults were taught, during Phase 1, the relation visual stimuli (A1/A2) to defined responses (R1/R2), and then, during Phase 2, the relation visual stimuli (B1/B2) to visual stimuli (A1/A2). During Phase 2 trials, the samples were novel, and comparisons were the original discriminative stimuli (B1/A1 and B2/B2). When the sample stimuli appeared on the screen (B1/B2), any of the previously defined responses (R1/R2) produced the comparisons (A1/A2). In Experiment II two adults were exposed to the same procedures of Experiment I for 3 classes (A1/B1/R1; A2/B2/R2; and A3/B3/R3). Six of the seven participants came to respond to samples B during Phase 2 trials in the same way they responded to A, respectively, during Phase 1 trials. These results suggested that defined responses, along with the stimulus members of an analytic unit, participate in the equivalence relation. |
| |
| Teaching Auditory-Visual Matching-To-Sample: A Comparison Between Prompt Delay And No Delay For Point Prompt Procedures. |
| MARIA ANDRADE (New England Center for Children), Paula Ribeiro Braga-Kenyon (New England Center for Children), Nicole Groskreutz (New England Center for Children), Caio F. Miguel (New England Center for Children), Shannon Trimmer (New England Center for Children), Erin C. McDermott (New England Center for Children) |
| Abstract: The purpose of this study was to compare a time delay prompt procedure and a no delay prompt procedure in teaching auditory-visual matching-to-sample. A thirteen-year-old female with autism participated in this study. Prior to the experimental phases, the participant demonstrated differentiated performance given an auditory visual matching-to-sample task with known stimuli. The Prompt Delay (PD) procedure involved a 1 s progressive delay fading of a point prompt. The No Delay (ND) procedure consisted of a 0 s delay point prompt across all teaching sessions. Mastery was demonstrated during post-training probe trials. These probe trials were conducted at the end of each session, with the stimuli from each condition interspersed. Primary dependent variables included the percentage of correct independent responses emitted during post-session probes and the number of trials to criterion for each procedure. Results obtained with this participant indicated that auditory visual discriminations were more promptly acquired using the PD procedure than the ND procedure. Attempts to replicate these results with additional participants are currently in progress. |
| |
| The Effect of Teaching the Response in the Emergence of Novel Intraverbals. |
| LUIS ANTONIO PEREZ-GONZALEZ (Universidad de Oviedo, Spain), Carlota Belloso-Diaz (Universidad de Oviedo, Spain), Gladys Williams (Applied Behavioral Consultant Services, NY) |
| Abstract: Previous studies have shown that children often do not demonstrate the emergence of intraverbals. We wondered whether teaching operants with the same response form as the intraverbal targeted to emerge would facilitate this emergence. First, we taught an intraverbal with two relevant stimuli and one response (e.g., we taught, “Name the tribe of Pakistan” –the correct response was, “The Kalash”) and then we probed the intraverbal with the stimulus/response functions of two relevant elements inverted (e.g., we reversed the functions of “Pakistan” and “Kalash” by asking “Name the country of the Kalash” –the correct response was “Pakistan”). Children did not show the emergence of the novel intraverbals. Subsequently we used either one of two conditions. In Condition 1, we taught participants to tact a picture with the same response as the probed intraverbal. When novel intraverbals were probed again, five of six children showed the emergence of the novel intraverbals. In Condition 2 we taught the children another intraverbal with the same response as the probed intraverbal. When novel intraverbals were probed again, all children showed emergence. Results suggest that teaching tacts and intraverbals with the same response as the probed intraverbals facilitates the emergence of intraverbals. |
|
| |