Written Lists as Mediating Stimuli in the Matching‐to‐sample Performances of Individuals With Mental Retardation

Abstract

Students with mental retardation learned to write lists in order to perform a matching task that they could not do otherwise. After an initial assessment phase, reinforcement was arranged in the computerized tasks to follow selection of the six pictures that were identical to those in the six-picture samples presented. In Study 1, even though the participants wrote a list of the names of the six sample pictures on each trial, read a list, or did both, they often made errors when a brief delay preceded picture selection. In contrast, performance was nearly perfect when a list was written, read, and remained available at the time of picture selection, suggesting that the list served to mediate the delays. Study 2 examined the stimulus control by two- and six-picture samples over the list writing. Early during testing, 1 participant refrained from writing lists on two-picture trials but wrote lists on six-picture trials, thereby maximizing reinforcement and minimizing its delay; the other participant showed this pattern of list writing after supplemental training. The studies suggest methods for establishing a rudimentary repertoire of mediating behavior that has relevance for teaching instruction-following skills in natural settings.

Designing Interventions That Include Delayed Reinforcement: Implications of Recent Laboratory Research

“…Verbal stimuli, for example, might be produced by the individual in the form of spoken or written self-instructions or self-prompts (e.g., see Jay, Grote, & Baer, 1999;Stromer, Mackay, Howell, McVay, & Flusser, 1996;Stromer, Mackay, McVay, & Fowler, 1998;Taylor & O'Reilly, 1997). Functional communication training (Carr & Durand, 1985;Durand & Carr, 1991) might serve as a means by which individuals can produce their own conditioned reinforcers as well.…”

Integrating Basic and Applied Research and the Utility of Lattal and Perone's Handbook of Research Methods in Human Operant Behavior

“…These sections are meaningful because they acknowledge some of the complexities of analyses of choice in everyday situations (Fuqua, 1984;Mace, 1994). For example, whether an individual with developmental disabilities who is able to write a shopping list actually chooses to do so may depend on (a) the number of items to be purchased at the store (and need to be remembered without a list), (b) the consequences for making some or all of the purchases desired, and (c) whether self-instructions to write a list occur (e.g., Stromer, Mackay, McVay, & Fowler, 1998).…”

“…Others have also discussed the virtues of a behavioral approach to memory (e.g., Branch, 1994;Catania, 1998;Donahoe & Palmer, 1994;Palmer, 1991), but the area awaits programmatic applied research. The possibilities are numerous for fresh approaches to the question, and there are several areas of relevant empirical research, including protocol analysis (see comments below on verbal behavior), investigations of the effects of oral and written naming on other nonvocal behavior (e.g., Constantine & Sidman, 1975;Geren, Stromer, & Mackay, 1997;Stromer et al, 1998), and interventions to teach self-instruction strategies (e.g., Duarte & Baer, 1994;Taylor & O'Reilly, 1997). Finally, there is the intriguing notion that the formation of stimulus classes may influence what one remembers and forgets (Spradlin, Saunders, & Saunders, 1992;and see Branch, 1994, on semantic networks).…”

“…For example, when performing tasks like arithmetic and handwriting, a student may be indifferent to favorable and unfavorable reinforcement contingencies (e.g., more or less frequent reinforcers; greater or fewer reinforcers) unless supplemental interventions are used Neef et al, 1992). One such supplemental intervention might involve verbal instructions (along with modeling and differential feedback) to teach a student to self-instruct (''I'll get more points if I do the hard problems and not the easy ones'') while making choices among learning activities (e.g., Stromer et al, 1998; and see Duarte & Baer, 1994;Horne & Lowe, 1993).…”

Acquisition and Expansion of Kanji Vocabulary through Computer-Based Teaching in a Student with Mental Retardation : Analysis by Equivalence Relations

“…Since students with developmental disabilities have diMculty producing equivalence relations (Devany, Hayes, & Nelson, 1986;Yamamoto, 1994) (Eikeseth & Smith, l992;Saunders, 1989;Stromer & Mackay, 1996;Yamamoto,1994;Yamamoto & Tokutake, 1997 (Sidman, 2000). (Stromer, Mackay, & Stoddard, 1992 , vocabulary acquisition (Stromer, Mackay, McVay, & Fowler, 1998), listening (Merzenich, Jenkins, Johnston, Schreiner, Miller, & Tallal, 1996), comprehension (Tallal, MMer, Bedi, Byma, Wang, Nagarajan, Schreiner, Jenkins, & Merzenich, 1996), sentence construction (Yamamoto & Miya, 1999), and L18-grammatical development (Tallal et al, 1996 (Merzenich et al, 1996;Tallal et al,, 1996). …”