|Investigating Bi-Directional Operants and Capabilities|
|Saturday, May 26, 2018|
|12:00 PM–12:50 PM |
|Manchester Grand Hyatt, Coronado Ballroom DE|
|Area: DEV/VRB; Domain: Translational|
|Chair: JeanneMarie Speckman-Kilroe (Fred S. Keller School Teachers College Columbia University)|
|CE Instructor: JeanneMarie Speckman-Kilroe, Ph.D.|
Naming across both listener and speaker responses and intraverbal responding may be defined as bi-directional because of the speaker-listener bi-directional relations involved in each of these types of behavior (Miguel, 2016). We report on three studies focusing on bi-directional operants and how, when and under which environmental conditions each may be acquired. In the first paper we present data on 49 participants between the ages of 18 months and 3 years. We investigated when and how these children acquired the listener half (uni-directional) and both the listener and speaker components (bi-directional) of Naming. In the second paper we report on experiments testing the effects of a Multiple Exemplar Instruction (MEI) procedure on bi-directional naming (BiN) and delayed drawing responses as a measure of conditioned seeing for school-aged students with Autism. Our final paper reports on the emergence of intraverbals and speaker-as-own-listener behaviors (Naming, say-do responding and self-talk) in toddlers with and without identified disabilities or delays.
|Instruction Level: Intermediate|
|Target Audience: |
Behavior analyst practitioners, supervisors and school personnel
|Learning Objectives: 1. Participants will be able to define uni-directional and bi-directional Naming, and identify a procedure to induce the capability. 2. Participants will be able to define speaker-as-own listener behavior, give examples and identify a procedure that has been shown to teach SOL operants. 3. Participants will be able to define conditioned seeing as it relates to naming and identify a procedure to test for CS.|
The Prevalence of Uni-Directional and Bi-Directional Naming in One to Three-Year-Old Children: An Analysis of the Number of Naming Experiences to Acquisition
|Cesira K. Farrell (Fred S. Keller School), STAVRA NICOLE ROMAS (Fred S.Keller School), JeanneMarie Speckman-Kilroe (Fred S. Keller School Teachers College Columbia University), R. Douglas Greer (Columbia University Teachers College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences)|
We tested 49 children between the ages of 18 and 36 month for the presence of the listener half (uni-directional) and full (bi-directional) Naming. Students were provided with Naming experiences which included the presentation of visual and auditory stimuli (participants saw and heard the names of pictures). Tests for uni-directional and bi-directional Naming were conducted after each three sessions of Naming experiences across four different stimuli. The results are discussed in terms of differences across chronological age groups and analyses of other relations are presented.
|Conditioned Reinforcement for Delayed Drawing Responses as Related to Bidirectional Naming and Conditioned Seeing|
|NOOR YOUNUS SYED (Teachers College, Columbia University; Manhattanville College)|
|Abstract: The emergence of delayed drawing responses to contrived novel stimuli as a potential component of bidirectional naming (BiN) repertoires was investigated with participants diagnosed with autism in three experiments, all utilizing a delayed multiple probe design. In Experiment I, BiN and delayed drawing responses were assessed as a measure of conditioned seeing. Six participants were matched for level of verbal behavior then assigned to a multiple exemplar instruction (MEI) or control group. Results indicated emergence of BiN and conditioned seeing repertoires only for students in the MEI experimental group. Experiment II studied the emergence of BiN repertoires as a function of operant conditioning procedures following the delivery of an echoic with two participants who initially demonstrated delayed drawing but did not demonstrate BiN. Results indicated that BiN repertoires for contrived stimuli emerged following the intervention. Experiment III sought to further isolate the properties of the operant conditioning procedure by eliminating the echoic with four participants who did not demonstrate BiN or delayed drawing. Results indicated that BiN and delayed drawing repertoires emerged following the establishment of conditioned reinforcement for observing and drawing novel contrived stimuli, providing evidence that a history of conditioned reinforcement is crucial in incidental language acquisition.|
An Investigation Into the Speaker-as-Own-Listener Repertoire and Reverse Intraverbal Responding
|CESIRA K. FARRELL (Fred S. Keller School)|
I conducted 2 experiments investigating the relations between speaker-as-own-listener cusps and responding to reverse intraverbals. Speaker-as-own-listener (SOL) cusps include, Naming, Say-Do Correspondence and Self-Talk Fantasy Play. During a pilot experiment, I found the source of the problem in 2 participants' learning was their deficient speaker-as-own-listener repertoires. Participants in the pilot lacked Say-Do and Self-Talk developmental cusps. Following a Self-Talk Immersion intervention, Say-Do was induced for both participants and coincidentally; correct responses to reverse intraverbals emerged. In Experiment I, I continued examining relations between the speaker-as-own-listener repertoire and intraverbal responding with a statistical analysis of 35 Early Intervention (EI) and Preschool students recruited from CABAS model schools who functioned at listener and speaker levels of verbal behavior. Findings from Experiment I indicated that the presence of Say-Do Correspondence and Self-Talk were significantly correlated to correct responses to reverse intraverbals. Experiment II was a functional analysis, during which 5 participants were selected from an EI classroom due to their similar levels of verbal behavior, deficient SOL repertoire, and because they could not respond to reverse intraverbals. Results indicated a functional relation between the presence of Say-Do Correspondence and Self-Talk and correct responses to intraverbal probes for all 5 participants.