REINFORCEMENT OF VISUAL ATTENDING IN CLASSROOMS FOR DEAF CHILDREN¹

Abstract

The efficacy of immediate tangible reinforcement in increasing appropriate visual attending for entire classes of deaf children was examined. The subjects were three classes (seven children each) in a residential school for the deaf. Boxes were installed on each child's desk, with lights that were flashed immediately contingent upon 10 sec of visual attending. Light flashes were backed up by M & M's, cereal bits, or tokens. In two of the classes, extinction sessions were also scheduled. For all classes, the reinforcement procedure increased visual attending by 50% or more, maintaining it at rates above 82%. Withdrawal of tangibles decreased attending back to baseline levels. The results support analysis of attending as operant behavior and demonstrate the applicability of reinforcement procedures in modifying these behaviors for young deaf children in a classroom setting.The operant characteristics of attending responses have been well established (Holland, 1957(Holland, , 1958Schroeder, 1967). As such, attending is subject to methods of behavioral modification that have proved successful for a wide range of response classes. Coupled with the recent success of behavioral modification programs in the classroom (Birnbrauer, Bijou, Wolf, and Kidder, 1965; Birnbrauer, Wolf, Kidder, and Tague, 1966;Hewett, 1967;Nolen, Kunzelmann, and Haring, 1967;O'Leary and Becker, 1967;and Valett, 1966), these experiments provide a basis for attempts to alter attending behavior in a classroom situation. In an unpublished paper, Brown (1967) reported a procedure that increased attending behavior with four deaf-retardates on an individual basis. Also, Lennan (1967) described a pilot project with a class of emotionally-disturbed deaf boys in the California School for the Deaf, Riverside, which involved a Hewett-type classroom procedure dealing

The Effects of Extinction, Noncontingent Reinforcement, and Differential Reinforcement of Other Behavior as Control Procedures

“…The procedure used most commonly is the traditional extinction condition, in which reinforcers are simply no longer delivered (e.g., Craig & Holland, 1970;Green, Reid, Canipe, & Gardner, 1991). An alternative to the extinction procedure is the noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) control, in which the contingency is eliminated by delivering reinforcers according to a response-independent schedule (e.g., Hart, Reynolds, Baer, Brawley, & Harris, 1968;Lattal, 1969).…”

Working from a modus operandi: Themes, changes, and parallels in research and clinical practices

“…My spouse was James G. Holland, who was a Research Fellow at Harvard with B. F. Skinner" (Holland, 2005, p. 4). In her earliest work, covering the period between 1963 and 1974, she used methods such as programmed instruction (Holland, 1970) and errorless learning to teach sounds to promote auditory discrimination (Holland, 1967) and to attain children's visual attention (Craig & Holland, 1970). She also researched the efficacy of operant methods for teaching syntax and improving the language comprehension of adults with aphasia (Holland & Levy, 1971;Holland & Sonderman, 1974).…”

Development of an Observation Instrument to Assess Behavior

“…Craiq and Holland (1970) developed an instrument to code specific.non-attending behaviors but gave no attending This system required a great deal of judgment by the observer, an undesirable requirement. The categories also grouped all students together and did not identify specific behavio~s.…”