A further evaluation of the effects of listener training on derived categorization and speaker behavior in children with autism

Lee, Greg P.; Miguel, Caio F.; Darcey, Emily K.; Jennings, Adrienne M.

doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2015.04.007

Cited by 34 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The fact that she vocalized in only 56 % of trials, and yet responded at a high accuracy in MTS suggests that either she did not use the verbal strategy in some trials, or did so covertly. P4's performance supports previous studies (e.g., Kobari-Wright and Miguel 2014;Miguel et al 2008;Lee et al 2015;Miguel and Kobari-Wright 2013) that found that when participants are required to tact the sample, their visual-visual MTS performance improves as tacting stimuli may serve to generate the discriminative stimulus necessary to evoke the selection response.…”

Section: [A'] Goes With [B'])supporting

confidence: 83%

“…This is because the picture of the poodle already occasioned listener behavior. This interpretation is also corroborated by improvements in categorization performance when participants were required to tact the samples (e.g., Lee et al 2015;Lowe et al 2002;Miguel et al 2008;Miguel and Kobari-Wright 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 72%

“…Previous naming research has shown that when participants fail to engage in speaker behavior, they also fail related MTS tests (e.g., Kobari-Wright and Miguel 2014). Moreover, when the speaker repertoire is improved through additional training, so is MTS performance (e.g., Lee et al 2015). Thus, future studies should further evaluate this co-dependency between intraverbal naming and MTS performance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Training Intraverbal Naming to Establish Matching-to-Sample Performances

Santos

Lindı́n

Miguel

2015

Analysis Verbal Behav

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study evaluated whether training intraverbal naming would be sufficient to establish visual-visual matching-to-sample (MTS) performances in college students. In the first experiment, we used a multiple-probe design across stimulus sets to assess whether six participants could match arbitrary visual stimuli (AB) after learning to tact their two experimentally defined classes (A' and B') and then intraverbally relate their names (i.e., BA' goes with B'^). All participants matched the stimuli accurately after training, as well as emitted the trained intraverbals. In the second experiment, we used a multiple baseline design across four participants to assess whether the same training would produce bi-directional intraverbals in the form of BB' goes with A',^and MTS performance consistent with symmetry (BA). All participants responded accurately during matching and intraverbal tests. Across both experiments, participants stated the trained intraverbals while performing the matching task. Results showed that MTS performance can be established solely by verbal behavior training.

show abstract

Section: [A'] Goes With [B'])supporting

confidence: 83%

mentioning

confidence: 72%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Training Intraverbal Naming to Establish Matching-to-Sample Performances

Santos

Lindı́n

Miguel

2015

Analysis Verbal Behav

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Once interdependence between speaker and listener repertoires (i.e., naming) is established, either training condition will simultaneously establish both tact and listener behavior (Horne & Lowe, 1996). While preliminary findings suggest this interdependence begins to occur around 30 months in typical development (Lee et al, 2015), several studies involving children with disabilities have suggested that this interdependence can be established through specific training procedures, such as multiple exemplar instruction (Greer, Stolfi, Chavez-Brown, & Rivera-Valdes, 2005;Fiorile & Greer, 2007;Greer, Stolfi, & Pistoljevic, 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…Subsequent reinforcement will simultaneously strengthen the tact as well as the listener behavior of orienting to the ball upon hearing the word Bball.^Horne and Lowe (1996) proposed that this interdependence allows children to acquire both tact and listener responses through instruction in either form. This suggestion has been supported in a variety of experimental studies with typically developing children (e.g., Lowe, Horne, Harris, & Randle, 2002;Horne, Lowe, & Randle, 2004;Lowe, Horne, & Hughes, 2005;Miguel, Petursdottir, Carr, & Michael, 2008) and children with ASD (e.g., Miguel & Kobari-Wright, 2013;Kobari-Wright & Miguel, 2014;Lee, Miguel, Darcey, & Jennings, 2015). Naming also allows children to acquire tact and listener skills through language pairings (e.g., the instructor labels an object in the presence of the learner), as demonstrated in experimental studies with typically developing children (e.g., Gilic & Greer, 2011;Longano & Greer, 2014) and children with ASD (e.g., Fiorile & Greer, 2007;Longano & Greer, 2014).…”

Section: Implications For Practicementioning

confidence: 73%

An Abbreviated Evaluation of the Efficiency of Listener and Tact Instruction for Children with Autism

Frampton

Robinson

Conine

et al. 2017

Behav Analysis Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We assessed the efficiency of tact and listener training for eight participants with autism spectrum disorder. Tact and listener probes were conducted in baseline for all target sets, and then tact training was initiated with one and listener training with another. Following mastery of one set, tact and listener probes were conducted with only the sets assigned to the same modality of training (i.e., sets 1, 3, and 5 for tact; sets 2, 4, and 6 for listener). Training and probes were repeated for all sets. The measures of efficiency included the number of skills mastered through direct training, the number of skills that emerged without training, the number of trials-to-criterion, and maintenance of skills. Clinical programming based on each participant's results is discussed. For six participants, tact training was more efficient than listener training across multiple measures. For the remaining two participants, tact training and listener training were considered equivalent.

show abstract

A systematic review of empirical intraverbal research: 2015–2020

Jennings

Vladescu

Miguel

et al. 2021

Behavioral Interventions

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The impact of Verbal Behavior (Skinner, 1957) on behavior analytic research, although not immediate, has steadily increased. Empirical investigations of verbal operants initially focused on mands and tacts, yet other operants such as intraverbals, echoics, and autoclitics have started to receive more attention. Aguirre et al. (2016) reviewed intraverbal research between 2005 and 2015. The results showed an increase in intraverbal research, with studies mostly focused on direct intraverbal training and emergent behavior. The authors noted the substantial increase in intraverbal studies assessing emergence, suggesting a subsequent brief review would be beneficial. The purpose of the current review was to replicate and extend Aguirre et al. In addition to analyzing publication trends and research emphasis, we also identified and quantified the skill sets of participants, the method and components of training, and additional procedural details. The findings show a continued increase in intraverbal research, with empirical evidence supporting prerequisite skills.

show abstract

A further evaluation of the effects of listener training on derived categorization and speaker behavior in children with autism

Cited by 34 publications

References 24 publications

Training Intraverbal Naming to Establish Matching-to-Sample Performances

Training Intraverbal Naming to Establish Matching-to-Sample Performances

An Abbreviated Evaluation of the Efficiency of Listener and Tact Instruction for Children with Autism

A systematic review of empirical intraverbal research: 2015–2020

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About