Evaluating Three Methods of Stimulus Rotation when Teaching Receptive Labels

  • Justin B. Leaf
  • Joseph H. Cihon
  • Julia L. Ferguson
  • John McEachin
  • Ronald Leaf
  • Mitchell Taubman
Research Article
  • 6 Downloads

Abstract

The teaching of receptive labels (i.e., auditory-visual conditional discriminations) is common among early intervention programs for individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Discrete trial teaching (DTT) is a common approach used to teach these receptive labels. Some have argued that the stimuli within the array, target and non-target, must be counterbalanced to prevent the development of undesired stimulus control. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of three different approaches to stimulus rotation to teach receptive labels to five young children diagnosed with ASD. These approaches included counterbalanced, fixed, and clinician’s choice. The results of an adapted alternating treatment design replicated across three stimulus sets and five participants indicated that all three methods of rotation were effective. Maintenance and generalization for targets taught in all three conditions was also assessed. The implications of the results with respect to current teaching practices in early intervention programs are discussed.

Keywords

Autism Conditional discrimination Receptive label DTT 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with 1964 Helsinki decoration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from the parents of all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Ayllon, T., & Azrin, N. (1968). The token economy: a motivational system for therapy and rehabilitation. Appleton-Century.Google Scholar
  2. Conallen, K., & Reed, P. (2016). A teaching procedure to help children with autistic spectrum disorder to label emotions. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 23, 63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Delfs, C. H., & Frampton, S. E. (2014). Practical implications of evaluating the efficiency of listener and tact instruction for children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 47, 810–813.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, D. M. (2007). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Fourth Edition (PPVT-4). Minneapolis: Pearson Assessments.Google Scholar
  5. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Grow, L. L., & Hijde, R. (2017). A comparison of procedures for teaching receptive labeling of sight words to a child with autism spectrum disorder. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Grow, L. L., Carr, J. E., Kodak, T. M., Jostad, C. M., & Kisamore, A. N. (2011). A comparison of methods for teaching receptive labeling to children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44, 475–498.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Grow, L. L., Kodak, T., & Carr, J. E. (2014). A comparison of methods for teaching receptive labeling to children with autism spectrum disorders: a systematic replication. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 47, 600–605.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Grow, L., & LeBlanc, L. (2013). Teaching receptive language skills: recommendations for instructors. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 6, 56–75.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Gutierrez, A., Jr., Hale, M. N., O’Brien, H. A., Fischer, A. J., Durocher, J. S., & Alessandri, M. (2009). Evaluating the effectiveness of two commonly used discrete trial procedures for teaching receptive discrimination to young children with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 3, 630–638.Google Scholar
  11. Heckaman, K. A., Alber, S., Hooper, S., & Heward, W. L. (1998). A comparison of least-to-most prompts and progressive time delay on the disruptive behavior of students with autism. Journal of Behavioral Education, 8, 171–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ingvarsson, E. T., & Hollobaugh, T. (2010). Acquisition of intraverbal behavior: teaching children with autism to mand for answers to questions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 1–17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. LeBlanc, L. A. (2014). Early intervention for young children with autism: Best practices for receptive language instruction. Workshop presented at the Ninth Annual Association for Behavior Analysis International Autism Conference. Las Vegas, NV.Google Scholar
  14. Leaf, J. B. (2012). An experimental approach for selecting a response-prompting strategy for children with developmental disabilities: a reply to Gast. Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 5, 226–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leaf, J. B., Cihon, J. H., Alcalay, A., Mitchell, E., Townley-Cochran, D., Miller, K., Leaf, R., Taubman, M., & McEachin, J. (2017). Instructive feedback embedded within group instruction for children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 50, 304–316.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Leaf, J. B., Cihon, J. H., Leaf, R., McEachin, J., & Taubman, M. (2016a). A progressive approach to discrete trial teaching: some current guidelines. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 9, 361–372.Google Scholar
  17. Leaf, J. B., Cihon, J. H., Townley-Cochran, D., Miller, K., Leaf, R., McEachin, J., & Taubman, M. (2016b). An evaluation of positional prompts for teaching receptive identification to individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 9, 349–363.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Leaf, J. B., Leaf, J. A., Alcalay, A., Kassardjian, A., Tsuji, K., Dale, S., Ravid, D., Taubman, M., McEachin, J., & Leaf, R. (2016c). Comparison of most-to-least prompting to flexible prompt fading for children with autism spectrum disorder. Exceptionality, 24, 109–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leaf, J. B., Leaf, R., Leaf, J. A., Alcalay, A., Ravid, D., Dale, S., et al. (2016d). Comparing paired-stimulus preference assessments with in-the-moment reinforcer analysis on skill acquisition: a preliminary investigation. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities. Advance online publication, 33, 14–24.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357616645329.
  20. Leaf, J. B., Leaf, R., McEachin, J., Taubman, M., Ala’i-Rosales, S., Ross, R. K., et al. (2016e). Applied behavior analysis is a science and, therefore, progressive. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46, 720–731.Google Scholar
  21. Leaf, R. B., & McEachin, J. J. (1999). A work in progress: behavior management strategies and a curriculum for intensive behavioral treatment of autism. New York: Different Roads to Learning.Google Scholar
  22. Leaf, R. B., Taubman, M. T., McEachin, J. J., Leaf, J. B., & Tsuji, K. H. (2011). A program description of a community-based intensive behavioral intervention program for individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 34, 259–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lerman, D. C., Valentino, A. L., & Leblanc, L. A. (2016). Discrete trial training. In R. Lang, T. B. Hancock, & N. N. Singh (Eds.), Early intervention for young children with autism spectrum disorder (pp. 47–83). Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
  24. Libby, M. E., Weiss, J. S., Bancroft, S., & Ahearn, W. H. (2008). A comparison of most-to-least and least-to-most prompting on acquisition of solitary play skills. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1, 37–43.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Lovaas, O. I. (1981). Teaching developmentally disabled children: the Me Book. Austin: PRO-ED Books.Google Scholar
  26. Lovaas, O. I. (1987). Behavioral treatment and normal educational and intellectual functioning in young autistic children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 3–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Lovaas, O. I. (2003). Teaching individuals with developmental delays: basic intervention techniques. Austin: PRO-ED Books.Google Scholar
  28. MacDuff, G. S., Krantz, P. J., & McClannahan, L. E. (2001). Prompts and prompt-fading strategies for people with autism. In C. Maurice, G. Green, & R. M. Foxx (Eds.), Making a difference behavioral intervention for autism (pp. 37–50). Austin: Pro Ed.Google Scholar
  29. Martin, N., & Brownell, R. (2011). Expressive one-word picture vocabulary test (4th ed.). Novato: ATP Assessments.Google Scholar
  30. Miranda-Linné, F., & Melin, L. (1992). Acquisition, generalization, and spontaneous use of color adjectives: a comparison of incidental teaching and traditional discrete-trial procedures for children with autism. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 13, 191–210.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Nuzzolo-Gomez, R., Leonard, M. A., Ortiz, E., Rivera, C. M., & Greer, R. D. (2002). Teaching children with autism to prefer books or toys over stereotypy or passivity. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 4, 80–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Shillingsburg, M. A., Bowen, C. N., & Shapiro, S. K. (2014). Increasing social approach and decreasing social avoidance in children with autism spectrum disorder during discrete trial training. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 8, 1443–1453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sidman, M. (1992). Adventitious control by the location of comparison stimuli in conditional discriminations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 58, 173–182.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Sidman, M., Rauzin, R., Lazar, R., Cunningham, S., Tailby, W., & Carrigan, P. (1982). A search for symmetry in the conditional discriminations of rhesus monkeys, baboons, and children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 23–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Soluaga, D., Leaf, J. B., Taubman, M., McEachin, J., & Leaf, R. (2008). A comparison of flexible prompt fading and constant time delay for five children with autism. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 2, 753–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sparrow, S., Balla, D., & Cicchetti, D. V. (1984). The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (survey form). Circle Pines: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
  37. Taubman, M., Brierley, S., Wishner, J., Baker, D., McEachin, J., & Leaf, R. B. (2001). The effectiveness of a group discrete trial instructional approach for preschoolers with developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 22, 205–219.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Walker, G. (2008). Constant and progressive time delay procedures for teaching children with autism: a literature review. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 261–275.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Wolery, M., & Gast, D. L. (1984). Effective and efficient procedures for the transfer of stimulus control. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 4, 52–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Justin B. Leaf
    • 1
    • 2
  • Joseph H. Cihon
    • 1
    • 2
  • Julia L. Ferguson
    • 1
  • John McEachin
    • 1
  • Ronald Leaf
    • 1
  • Mitchell Taubman
    • 1
  1. 1.Autism Partnership FoundationSeal BeachUSA
  2. 2.Endicott CollegeBeverlyUSA

Personalised recommendations