Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sample First versus Comparison First Stimulus Presentations: Preliminary Findings for Two Individuals with Autism

  • Brief Practice
  • Published:
Behavior Analysis in Practice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The current study was a replication of Petursdottir and Aguilar (Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46, 58–68, 2016). Two different stimulus presentations were evaluated during auditory-visual discrimination training. A sample-first procedure, in which the sample stimulus was presented before the comparison stimuli, was compared to a comparison-first procedure, in which the sample presentation was presented after the comparison stimuli. The results indicated that both participants learned more quickly in the comparison-first condition, a finding that differed from Petursdottir and Aguilar (Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46, 58–68, 2016).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Coon, J. T., & Miguel, C. F. (2012). The role of increased exposure to transfer-of-stimulus control procedures on the acquisition of intraverbal behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45, 657–666. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-657.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Doughty, A. H., & Saunders, K. J. (2009). Decreasing errors in reading-related matching to sample using a delayed-sample procedure. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 717–721. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2009.42-717.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Green, G. (2001). Behavior analytic instruction for learners with autism: Advances in stimulus control technology. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 16, 72–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leaf, R., & McEachin, J. (Eds.). (1999). A work in progress: Behavior management strategies and a curriculum for intensive behavioral treatment of autism. New York, NY: DRL Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovaas, O. I. (2003). Teaching individuals with developmental delays: Basic intervention techniques. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, N., & Brownell, R. (2011). Receptive one-word picture vocabulary test (4th ed.). Novato, CA: Academy Therapy Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • McIlvane, W. J., Kledaras, J. B., Stoddard, L. T., & Dube, W. V. (1990). Delayed sample presentation in MTS: Some possible advantages for teaching individuals with developmental limitations. Human Behavior Bulletin, 8, 31–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miguel, C. F., Frampton, S. E., Lantaya, C. A., LaFrance, D. L., Quah, K., Meyer, C. S., et al. (2015). The effects of tact training on the development of analogical reasoning. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 104, 96–118. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.167.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Petursdottir, A. I., & Aguilar, G. (2016). Order of stimulus presentation influences children’s acquisition in receptive identification tasks. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46, 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, K. A., Devine, B., Aguilar, G., & Petursdottir, A. I. (2018). Stimulus presentation order in receptive identification tasks: A systematic replication. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 51, 634–646. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.459.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Vedora, J., Barry, T., & Ward-Horner, J. C. (2017). An evaluation of differential observing responses during receptive label training. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10, 290–295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-017-0188-6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Evergreen Center, Milford, MA, USA

    Joseph Vedora, Tiffany Barry & John C. Ward-Horner

Authors
  1. Joseph Vedora
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tiffany Barry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John C. Ward-Horner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joseph Vedora.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Joseph Vedora declares that he has no conflict of interest. Tiffany Barry declares that she has no conflict of interest. John C. Ward-Horner declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

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.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vedora, J., Barry, T. & Ward-Horner, J.C. Sample First versus Comparison First Stimulus Presentations: Preliminary Findings for Two Individuals with Autism. Behav Analysis Practice 12, 423–429 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-018-00299-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-018-00299-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation