Generalization of Supermarket Shopping Skills for Individuals with Mild Intellectual Disabilities Using Stimulus Equivalence Training

Abstract

We developed an intervention to promote generalization in an applied community setting. The intervention was derived primarily from experimental research examining stimulus equivalence classes and natural categories. Six young adults with intellectual disabilities were taught using (a) stimulus equivalence training, (b) multiple exemplar training, or (c) single instance training to complete a supermarket shopping task analysis. Results indicated that stimulus equivalence and multiple exemplar training were equally effective in promoting generalization with single instance training being the least effective.

Efficiently Establishing Concepts of Inferential Statistics and Hypothesis Decision Making Through Contextually Controlled Equivalence Classes

“…Although research shows that this type of instruction can generate academically relevant skills, for the most part it remains to be seen whether such gains will occur under a given set of everyday instructional circumstances (e.g., Chorpita, 2003). In addition, whether EBI really is more efficient than other techniques has rarely been tested (for an example, see Taylor & O'Reilly, 2000).…”

“…Although laboratory studies have established complex equivalence‐based repertoires in typically functioning adults using arbitrary stimuli (e.g., Belanich & Fields, 2003; Dougher, Perkins, Greenway, Koons, & Chiasson, 2002; Griffee & Dougher, 2002; Lane, Clow, Innis, & Critchfield, 1998; Pilgrim & Galizio, 1995), there have been few attempts to employ instruction based on stimulus equivalence and other stimulus relations (hereafter called equivalence‐based instruction; EBI) to enhance the teaching of high‐level learners. Most stimulus equivalence research that bridges basic science and application has been conducted with individuals with intellectual challenges (e.g., de Rose, de Souza, & Hanna, 1996; Lane & Critchfield, 1998; Sidman & Cresson, 1973; Taylor & O'Reilly, 2000) or with typically developing children (Connell & Witt, 2004; Lynch & Cuvo, 1995).…”

Teaching Equivalence Relations to Individuals with Minimal Verbal Repertoires: Are Visual and Auditory-Visual Discriminations Predictive of Stimulus Equivalence?

“…Over the years, several studies have used a stimulus equivalence paradigm to teach simple reading skills (Sidman, Cresson, & Willson-Morris, 1974) as well as a variety of other practical skills to individuals with disabilities including manual signing (Osborne & Gatch, 1989;VanBiervliet, 1977); pre-arithmetic skills (Gast, Vanbiervliet, & Spradlin, 1979); spelling (Stromer &. Mackay, 1992Mackay, 1985); name-face matching (Cowley, Green, & Braunling-McMorrow, 1992); shopping skills (Taylor & O'Reilly, 2000); monetary skills (McDonagh, Mcllvane, & Stoddard, 1984); relations among objects, spoken words, and lexigrams (Brady & McLean, 2000); and relations among consonants, spoken words, and pictures (Carr et aI., 2000).…”

Transportability of Equivalence‐based Programmed Instruction: Efficacy and Efficiency in a College Classroom

“…However, the effectiveness and efficiency of an instructional intervention are best evaluated by comparing its outcomes (e.g., postintervention performance, time to accomplish those effects) to those of typical practice. For example, Taylor and O'Reilly (2000) compared EBI to non-EBI instruction with adults with mild intellectual disabilities. Although the two approaches were equally effective in establishing the targeted skills (i.e., grocery shopping), EBI training required less time to promote mastery.…”