Nonsimultaneous stimulus presentations and their role in listener naming

Abstract

Previous studies on naming have presented the object and its name simultaneously during both training and testing, and thus the training component may establish a transformation of function directly between the object and the name. Successful tests for listener naming may thus not require the emergence of a novel (entailed) transformation of function. The current study aimed to control for this possibility by presenting the object and the name sequentially and nonsimultaneously. Eight typically developing toddlers participated in the current study. During name training, objects and names were presented nonsimultaneously, and all participants failed to emit listener-naming responses during the first test session. Subsequently, 4 participants received multiple exemplar training, which led to improvements in listener naming for all 4; and speaker naming for only 1 participant. As a control condition, the remaining 4 participants were tested repeatedly, without multiple exemplar training, and did not show any consistent improvements in their listener or speaker performances. Multiple exemplar training thus appeared to be effective in establishing generalized listener responses, which involved generating entailed transformation of functions. The strategy of using nonsimultaneous stimulus presentations could allow for greater precision in identifying the behavioral processes involved in listener-naming.

Relational frame theory 20 years on: The Odysseus voyage and beyond

“…Conceptualizing and interpreting work through the lens of the HDML has also lent itself to other areas within the behavioranalytic literature such as naming, rulegoverned behavior and perspective-taking. In the case of naming, recent research has begun to explore variables related to orienting in young children in the context of learning to name stimuli (Sivaraman et al, 2021). Specifically, this study aimed to determine if a child learning to name a novel stimulus involved deriving a bidirectional stimulus relation when orienting responses occur simultaneously with the presentation of the spoken name.…”

Verbal behavior development theory and relational frame theory: Reflecting on similarities and differences

“…One area in which a collaborative focus for RFT and VBDT could be of benefit is in the experimental analyses of BiN. Indeed, a recent study provides what we believe to be a strong example (Sivaraman et al, 2021). The authors of this study pointed out that most behavioral research on naming involved presenting an object and its name simultaneously during both training and testing, and thus the training component may establish a transformation of function directly between the object and the name.…”

“…Consequently, successful tests for listener naming may not require the emergence of a novel (entailed) transformation of function. In the study reported by Sivaraman et al (2021), the researchers presented the object and the name sequentially and nonsimultaneously. They presented the object, and once the child made visual contact, they hid the object from view and then uttered its name.…”

Naming: What Do We Know So Far? A Systematic Review

“…Next, most previous research on naming has involved presenting the object and its name simultaneously. A recent study argued that when objects and their names are presented simultaneously, there may be no need to invoke a derived relation to explain emergent responding (see Sivaraman et al, 2021 , for a detailed analysis). That is, the object and name are presented contemporaneously and any emergent relation could be seen as being directly trained because the child sees object–hears name and hears name–sees object during the presentation.…”