Language generativity can be described as the ability to produce sentences never before said, and to understand sentences never before heard. One process often cited as underlying language generativity is response generalization. However, though the latter seems to promise a technical understanding of the former at a process level, an investigation of definitions and approaches to the term "response generalization" that appear in the literature suggests that it does not do so. We argue that a more promising candidate for the role of key process underlying language generativity is derived relational responding. We introduce the latter concept and describe empirical research showing its connection with language. We subsequently present a relational frame theory (RFT) conceptualization of derived relations as contextually controlled generalized relational responding. We then review a series of recent studies on derived manding in developmentally delayed children and adults that arguably demonstrate the applied utility of a derived relations-based approach with respect to the phenomenon of generative language.
The TARPA (Training & Assessment of Relational Precursors & Abilities) is a recently developed computer-based protocol for the assessment of a progression of key domains of responding critical to the development of generative language. In the current pilot study, five children with autism were assessed using the TARPA and their score on this protocol was correlated with ratings on the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales. Findings showed a statistically significant correlation. This and other features of TARPA performance and their implications for future testing and development of this protocol are discussed.
This article discusses theoretical issues relating to an apparent terminological inconsistency between two recent studies involving relational responding. These studies employed a functionally similar protocol to establish contextual cues for arbitrarily applicable relational responding by using a nonarbitrary relational responding procedure; however, one employed the term nonarbitrary regarding this procedure, and the other used arbitrary. Both can be legitimately described as correct, but they use apparently contradictory descriptions because they focus on different aspects of the protocol; in one, the label is based on traditional conditional discrimination task nomenclature, whereas in the other, it is based on the type of relational responding being performed. The current article describes and then explains the issue. In doing so, it touches on an important topic concerning the relation between relational responding and the conditional discrimination procedure.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.