Advertisement

Behavior Analysis in Practice

, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 22–32 | Cite as

Using a Prerequisite Skills Assessment to Identify Optimal Modalities for Mand Training

  • Amber L. ValentinoEmail author
  • Linda A. LeBlanc
  • Sarah E. Veazey
  • Lauren A. Weaver
  • Paige B. Raetz
Research Article

Abstract

This study examined the utility of a brief prerequisite assessment in predicting the subsequent effectiveness and rate of acquisition of mand training in each of three response modalities (sign, picture exchange, and vocalizations). Overall, the picture exchange was the most effective and efficient modality for acquiring the targeted mand. The vocal modality was the least effective except when the prerequisite assessment indicated that two-syllable vocal imitation was intact. The implications for selection of response modality for early mand training are discussed.

Keywords

Mand training Picture exchange-based communication Prerequisite skills Sign language Vocalizations 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Lani Fritts for his support and suggestions for this project. We thank Camille Summers-Godfrey, Heather Steffani, and Susanna Riley for help with conducting sessions and collecting data. Linda LeBlanc is now with LeBlanc Behavioral Consulting.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Adkins, T., & Axelrod, S. (2001). Topography-based versus selection-based responding: comparison of mand acquisitions in each modality. The Behavior Analyst Today, 2, 259–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bondy, A. (2001). PECS: potential benefits and risks. The Behavior Analyst Today, 2, 127–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bourret, J., Vollmer, T. R., & Rapp, J. T. (2004). Evaluation of a vocal mand assessment and vocal mand training procedures. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37, 129–144.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2004.37-129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bristow, D., & Fristoe, M. (1984). Learning of Blissymbols and manual sign. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 49, 145–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carbone, V. J., Sweeney-Kerwin, E. J., Attanasio, V., & Kasper, T. (2010). Increasing the vocal responses of children with autism and developmental disabilities using manual sign mand training and prompt delay. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 705–709.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2010.43-705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chambers, M., & Rehfeldt, R. A. (2003). Assessing the acquisition and generalization of two mand forms with adults with severe developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 24, 265–280.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0891-4222(03)00042-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Charlop-Christy, M. H., Carpenter, M., Le, L., LeBlanc, L. A., & Kellet, K. (2002). Using the picture exchange communication system (PECS) with children with autism: assessment of PECS acquisition, speech, social-communicative behavior, and problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35(3), 213–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Filipek, P. A., Accardo, P. J., Baranek, G. T., Cook Jr., E. H., Dawson, G., Gordon, B., et al. (1999). The screening and diagnosis of autistic spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 29, 439–484.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021943802493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fisher, W., Piazza, C. C., Bowman, L. G., Hagopian, L. P., Ownes, 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.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1992.25-491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gregory, M. K., DeLeon, I. J., & Richman, D. M. (2009). The influence of matching and motor imitation abilities on rapid acquisition of manual signs and exchange-based communicative responses. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 399–404.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2009.42-399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hagopian, L. P., Wilson, D. M., & Wilder, D. A. (2001). Assessment and treatment of problem behavior maintained by escape from attention and access to tangible items. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34, 229–232.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2001.34-229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kodak, T., Clements, A., Paden, A., LeBlanc, B., Mintz, J., & Tourssaint, K. (2015). Examination of the relation between an assessment of skills and performance on auditory-visual conditional discriminations for children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48, 52–70.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Michael, J. (1985). Two kinds of verbal behavior plus a possible third. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 3, 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mirenda, P. (2003). Toward functional augmentative and alternative communication for students with autism: manual signs, graphic symbols, and voice output communication aids. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 34, 203–216.  https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sigafoos, J. (1998). Assessing conditional use of graphic mode requesting in a young boy with autism. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 10, 133–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sundberg, M. L. (1993). Selecting a response form for nonverbal persons: facilitated communication, pointing systems, or sign language? The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 11, 99–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sundberg, M. L. (2008). VB-MAPP verbal behavior milestones assessment and placement program guide: a language and social skills assessment program for children with autism or other developmental disabilities. Concord: AVB Press.Google Scholar
  19. Sundberg, M. L., & Michael, J. (2001). The value of Skinner’s analysis of verbal behavior for teaching children with autism. Behavior Modification, 25, 698–724.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445501255003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sundberg, M. L., & Partington, J. (1998). Teaching language to children with autism or other developmental disabilities. Pleasant Hill: Behavior Analysts.Google Scholar
  21. Tincani, M. (2004). Comparing the picture exchange communication system and sign language training for children with autism. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 19, 152–163.  https://doi.org/10.1177/10883576040190030301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Torelli, J. N., Lambert, J. M., DaFonte, A. M., Denham, K. N., Jedrzynski, T. M., & Houcins-Juarez, N. J. (2015). Assessing acquisition of and preference for mand topographies during functional communication training. Behavior Analysis in Practice.Google Scholar
  23. Wraikat, R., Sundberg, C. T., & Michael, J. (1991). Topography-based and selection-based verbal behavior: a further comparison. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 9, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Trumpet Behavioral HealthDublinUSA
  2. 2.Vanderbilt University Medical CenterNashvilleUSA
  3. 3.Southwest Autism Research and Resource CenterPhoenixUSA

Personalised recommendations