The Analysis of Verbal Behavior

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 51–57 | Cite as

Teaching Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders to Mand for the Removal of Stimuli That Prevent Access to Preferred Items

  • M. Alice Shillingsburg
  • Nicole M. Powell
  • Crystal N. Bowen
Special Section on Motivating Operations and Verbal Behavior

Abstract

Mand training is often a primary focus in early language instruction and typically includes mands that are positively reinforced. However, mands maintained by negative reinforcement are also important skills to teach. These include mands to escape aversive demands or unwanted items. Another type of negatively reinforced mand important to teach involves the removal of a stimulus that prevents access to a preferred activity. We taught 5 participants diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders to mand for the removal of a stimulus in order to access a preferred item that had been blocked. An evaluation was conducted to determine if participants responded differentially when the establishing operations for the preferred item were present versus absent. All participants learned to mand for the removal of the stimulus exclusively under conditions when the establishing operation was present.

Key words

abolishing operation autism establishing operation language training mand negative reinforcement 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Carr, E. G., & Durand, V. M. (1985). Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 111–126. doi:10.1901/jaba.1985.18-111CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Drasgow, E., Halle, J. W., Ostrosky, M. M., & Harbers, H. M. (1996). Using behavior indication and functional communication training to establish an initial sign repertoire with a young child with severe disabilities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 16, 500–521. doi:10. 1177/027112149601600408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Duker, P. C., Dortmans, A., & Lodder, E. (1993). Establishing the manding function of communicative gestures with individuals with severe/profound mental retardation. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 14, 39–49. doi:10.1016/0891-4222 (93)90004-4CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Lalli, J. S., Casey, S., & Kates, K. (1995). Reducing escape behavior and increasing task completion with functional communication training, extinction, and response chaining. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 261–68. doi: 10.1901/ jaba.1995.28-261CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Lechago, S. A., Carr, J. E., Grow, L. L., Love, J. R., & Almason, S. M. (2010). Mands for information generalize across establishing operations. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43(3), 381–395. doi:10.1901/jaba.2010.43-381CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Neef, N. A., Walters, J., & Egel, A. L. (1984). Establishing generative yes/no responses in developmentally disabled children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 453–460. doi:10.1901/jaba. 1984.17-453CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Reichle, J., Rogers, N., & Barrett, C. (1984). Establishing pragmatic discriminations among the communicative functions of requesting, rejecting, and commenting in an adolescent. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 9(1), 31–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Schuster, J. W., Gast, D. L., Wolery, M., & Guiltinan, S. (1988). The effectiveness of a constant time-delay procedure to teach chained responses to adolescents with mental retardation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 169–178.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Shillingsburg, M. A., Kelley, M. E., Roane, H. S., Kisamore, A., & Brown, M. R. (2009). Evaluation and training of “yes/no” responding across verbal operants. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 209–23. doi:10.1901/jaba.2009.42-209CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Sigafoos, J., Drasgow, E., Reichle, J., O’Reilly, M., & Tait, K. (2004). Tutorial: Teaching communicative rejecting to children with severe disabilities. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 13, 31–42. doi:10.1044/1058- 0360(2004/005)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Sindelar, P. T., Rosenberg, M. S., & Wilson, R. J. (1985). An adapted alternating treatments design for instructional research. Education and Treatment of Children, 8, 67–76.Google Scholar
  12. Winborn, L., Wacker, D. P., Richman, D. M., Asmus, J., & Geier, D. (2002). Assessment of mand selection for functional communication training packages. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 295–298. doi:10.1901/jaba.2002.35-295CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Behavior Analysis International 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Alice Shillingsburg
    • 1
    • 2
  • Nicole M. Powell
    • 1
  • Crystal N. Bowen
    • 1
  1. 1.Marcus Autism CenterUniversity School of MedicineAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.Emory University School of MedicineUSA

Personalised recommendations