Advertisement

Behavior Analysis in Practice

, Volume 1, Issue 1, pp 37–43 | Cite as

A Comparison of Most-to-Least and Least-to-Most Prompting on the Acquisition of Solitary Play Skills

  • Myrna E. Libby
  • Julie S. Weiss
  • Stacie Bancroft
  • William H. Ahearn
Article

Abstract

Two studies are presented in which common prompting procedures were evaluated while teaching children with autism to build Lego® play structures. In the first study, most-to-least (MTL) and least-to-most (LTM) prompting were compared. All participants learned to build the play structures when the teacher used MTL, which was associated with fewer errors than LTM. Nonetheless, three participants learned more quickly with LTM. This finding suggests that MTL may prevent errors, but it sometimes slows learning. The second study compared LTM to MTL without and with a delay (MTLD). MTLD provided an opportunity for the child to independently initiate responding but still minimized the likelihood of errors. Results showed that acquisition was nearly as rapid when the teacher used MTLD as LTM but it produced fewer errors than LTM. Best practice guidelines for choosing prompting procedures are proposed.

Descriptors

autism behavior chains play skills prompting 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis. second edition. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Merril, 1987.Google Scholar
  2. Cronin, K. A., & Cuvo, A. J. (1979). Teaching mending skills to mentally retarded adolescents. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 12, 401–406.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Cuvo, A. J., Leaf, R. B., & Borakove, L. S. (1978). Teaching janitorial skills to the mentally retarded: acquisition, generalization and maintenance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 345–355.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Demchak, M. (1990). Response prompting and fading methods: A review. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 94, 603–615.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Fisher, W. W., Piazza, C. C., Bowman, L. G., Hagopian, L. P., Owens, J. C., & Slevin, I. (1992). A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 491–498.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Foxx, R. M. (1982). Increasing behaviors of persons with severe retardation and autism. Champaign, Illinois: Research Press, 1982.Google Scholar
  7. Gast, D. L., Doyle, P. M., Wolery, M., & Ault, M. J. (1991). Assessing the acquisition of incidental information by secondary-age students with mental retardation: comparison of response prompting strategies. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 96, 63–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Glendenning, N. J., Adams, G. L., & Sternberg, L. (1983). Comparison of prompt sequences. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 88, 321–325.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Kayser, J. E., Billingsley, F. F., & Neel, R. S. (1986). A comparison of in-context and traditional instructional approaches: Total task, single trial versus backward chaining, multiple trials. Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 11, 28–38.Google Scholar
  10. MacDuff, G. S., Krantz, P. J., & McClannahan, L. E. (1993). Teaching children with autism to use photographic activity schedules: maintenance and generalization of complex response chains. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 89–97.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Maciag, K. G., Schuster, J. W., Collins, B. C., & Cooper, J. T. (2000). Training adults with moderate and severe mental retardation in vocational skills using a simultaneous prompting procedure. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 35, 306–316.Google Scholar
  12. Schleien, S. J., Ash, T., Kiernan, J., & Wehman, P. (1981). Developing independent cooking skills in a profoundly retarded woman. Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 6, 23–29.Google Scholar
  13. Spooner, F. (1984). Comparisons of backward chaining and total task presentation in training severely handicapped persons. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 19, 15–22.Google Scholar
  14. Terrace, H. S. (1963). Discrimination learning with and without “errors”. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6, 1–27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Walls, R. T., Zane, T., & Ellis, W. D. (1981). Forward and backward chaining, and whole task methods. Behavior Modification, 5, 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Weeks, M., & Gaylord-Ross, R. (1981). Task difficulty and aberrant behavior in severely handicapped students. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14, 449–463CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Behavior Analysis International 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Myrna E. Libby
    • 1
    • 2
  • Julie S. Weiss
    • 1
  • Stacie Bancroft
    • 1
    • 2
  • William H. Ahearn
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.New England Center for ChildrenSouthboroughUSA
  2. 2.Northeastern UniversityBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations