Influence of Verbal Behavior Training on Performance for Sustainable Development in Childhood and Early Adolescence

Abstract

The effective teaching of language is an aspect of special relevance regarding the good adjustment of children in contexts such as school, family, or community. This article performs an experimental procedure to check which language teaching methodology is most effective in a sample of children. The objective was to analyze the influence of training, Condition 1 (pure tacts more intraverbal) or Condition 2 (pure tacts more impure tacts), on emergence of two tests involving impure tacts (AB-C, AB-D) and four new complex intraverbals (BC-D, BD-C) for each of two sets of stimuli (Set 1 and Set 2). The sample comprised 54 children aged between 6 and 12 years, divided into two groups of different experimental conditions. The results revealed statistically significant differences in performance on the tests of impure tacts and complex intraverbal, obtaining highly effective results in Condition 2. This teaching method using compound stimuli (impure tacts) clearly favors the expansion of language. The practical implications of this work can be more effective language teaching methodologies implemented that favor the good psychosocial adjustment of children in contexts such as family, school, or the community in general.

Auditory–Visual stimuli: Effects on derived relations with compound stimuli

“…Participants achieved greater success on the posttests in comparison with the previous experiment. Taken together, these findings seem to indicate that having a history of learning with compound stimuli (Phase 8) allows, to a greater extent, the transfer of what has been learned to new posttests (10, 11, 12) that include these types of stimuli, an aspect that is consistent with the data reported by Maldonado et al (2020).…”

“…Through the data found, it can be confirmed that the discrimination of the participants is produced through the structure of one to many, appearing this discrimination in tests with compound stimuli, after training with simple stimuli. Until now, research related to compound stimuli has shown better performance when participants have had a learning history with these compound stimuli (see Alonso‐Álvarez, 2010; Alonso‐Álvarez & Pérez‐González, 2006; Alós et al, 2013; Guerrero et al, 2015; Maldonado et al, 2020; Pérez‐González & Alonso‐Álvarez, 2008). If the results found here are confirmed, the mere teaching of simple stimuli (the present experiment) or paired stimuli (Carnerero & Pérez‐González, 2015; Carnerero et al, 2019) could allow for learning to transfer to new operants with simple or compound stimuli.…”

“…On the other hand, there are tasks in which, when responding, participants have to take into account two stimuli, the latter being defined as compound stimuli (see Alonso‐Álvarez, 2010; Alonso‐Álvarez & Pérez‐González, 2006; Alós et al, 2013; Guerrero et al, 2015; Maldonado et al, 2020; Pérez‐González & Alonso‐Álvarez, 2008). In this study, participants were required to respond on trials that included compound stimuli.…”

“…There are other discriminations that include two stimuli presented at the same time. In these discriminations, the response is conditional on the relationship that occurs between compound stimuli (see Alonso‐Álvarez, 2010; Alonso‐Álvarez & Pérez‐González, 2006; Alós et al, 2013; Guerrero et al, 2015; Maldonado, Alós, & Povedano‐Díaz, 2020; Pérez‐González & Alonso‐Álvarez, 2008). In these discriminations, the relationships that participants can learn are: A1B1‐C1, A1B2‐D1, A2B1‐C2, A2B2‐D2.…”

A systematic review of empirical intraverbal research: 2015–2020

“…(2016) and Jennings and Miguel (2017) used tact and intraverbal training to establish equivalence classes. Additionally, three experiments compared intraverbal training to tact training (6.1%; Daly & Dounavi, 2020; Maldonado et al., 2020; Wu et al., 2019). Nearly one third of experiments (29.2%) investigated the intraverbal as the dependent variable.…”