1 / 28

The Application of Skinner’s Analysis of Verbal Behavior to Children with Autism

The Application of Skinner’s Analysis of Verbal Behavior to Children with Autism.

guenevere-adams
Download Presentation

The Application of Skinner’s Analysis of Verbal Behavior to Children with Autism

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Application of Skinner’s Analysis of Verbal Behavior to Children with Autism

  2. “There are many behavior analytic procedures for arranging learning opportunities, some adult-initiated, some learner-initiated, some embedded in typically occurring activities or sequences of responses, and some that are hybrids or permutations of these. Each type of procedure has its uses and advantages. ABA programming uses any and all procedures to accomplish the job of skill development and skill generalization with each individual learner” (Green, 2001, p. 74)

  3. Skinner’s Analysis of LanguageLeBlanc et al. (2006) • While some behavior analysts teaching language to children with autism were heavily influenced by the UCLA program or Stokes and Baer (1977)… • Others were more heavily influenced byB.F. Skinner’s analysis of language • Verbal Behavior- 1957

  4. Five Verbal Operants • Mand • Tact • Intraverbal • Duplic • Codic

  5. Mand • Form of the response is controlled by an EO • Note: An SD may control its occurrence, but not always its form SD: Mom Response: “Cookie” SR+: Cookie EO: Hungry for cookie

  6. Mand • In everyday language, mands are “requests” for something specific, where the item requested is the reinforcer • Examples • Objects • “Can I have a Coke?” • Information • “What’s missing?” • Action • “Tickle me!”

  7. Tact • A verbal operant in which the response form is controlled by a nonverbal stimulus • Reinforced by nonspecific reinforcement (e.g., praise) • In everyday language, a tact is a “label”, evoked by a nonverbal stimulus SD: Cookie Response: “Cookie” SR+: “That’s right!”

  8. Examples: Tact • “Doggy” (“Good Girl!”) • “It’s raining.” (“Thanks, I’ll get an umbrella.”)

  9. Intraverbal • Response form is controlled by a verbal stimulus • Reinforced by nonspecific reinforcement (e.g., praise) • There is no point-to-point correspondence between the response and the verbal stimulus • What’s that? When parts of the response can be related to parts of the stimulus. SD: “What’s your favorite snack?” Response: “Cookie” SR+: “That’s right!”

  10. Examples: Intraverbal • (SD)-“What’s up?” (R)- “_____” • (SD)-“How are you?” (R)- “_____” • (SD)-“Red, white and ___?” (R)- “___”

  11. Duplic • Response form is controlled by a verbal stimulus • Reinforced by nonspecific reinforcement (e.g., praise) • There is point-to-point correspondence between the response and the verbal stimulus • There is formal similarity between the response product and the verbal stimulus • What’s that? They’re in the same sense mode and resemble each other. SD: “Cookie” Response: “Cookie” SR+: “That’s right!”

  12. Examples: Duplic • Echoic: “Hi” – “Hi” • Copying a text: see written word John – write John • Mimetic: see someone sign ball – sign ball

  13. All of the responses are of the same topography “eeee” – but are different operants because they have different types of controlling antecedents and consequences Mand Tact Echoic Intraverbal Joey wants his sister’s candy, and says, “eeee!” X Chris is watching Thomas and after Thomas says, “Percy”, he says “eeee!” X Julie’s mom sings, “Ring Around the Ros…” And Julie says “eeee!” X Karen sees a monkey on TV, points, and says, “eeee!” X

  14. Codic • Response form is controlled by a verbal stimulus • Reinforced by nonspecific reinforcement (e.g., praise) • There is point-to-point correspondence between the response and the verbal stimulus • NO formal similarity between the response and the verbal stimulus SD: “Cookie” Response: Write cookie SR+: “That’s right!”

  15. Examples: Codic • Textual behavior: See written Turn left – say “turn left” • Taking dictation: “Buy juice” – write buy juice

  16. “Applied Verbal Behavior” (AVB) • The application of Skinner’s analysis to language training for children with autism and other developmental disabilities

  17. AVB and NTA ComparisonsLeBlanc et al. (2006) • Linguistic Framework • Motivation • Spontaneity

  18. Linguistic Framework(LeBlanc et al.,2006; Sundberg & Partington, 1999) • Language is taught and conceptualized in terms of the verbal operants rather than using a traditional structural analysis • Most research is published in The Analysis of Verbal Behavior and JABA and is not as easily accessed or consumed by teachers, speech therapists • Assessment of Basic Language and Learning Skills (ABLLS) • Corresponding language assessment that guides published curriculum for instruction • VB-MAPPwww.marksundberg.com/vb-mapp.htm

  19. Motivation (Sundberg & Partington, 1998) • Mands are taught first because the mand “is a unique type of language that directly benefits the child by letting his caretakers know exactly what he wants at that particular moment” (p. 110)

  20. Motivation: Natural Environment Training (NET)(Sundberg & Partington, 1998; Sundberg & Partington, 1999) • Based on NLP? And the “general orientation” (S&P, 1999, p. 151) of incidental teaching • Language training is conducted in the natural environment • Child directed teaching activities and functional reinforcers are used • Generalization is programmed for

  21. Other Characteristics of “AVB Programs” • More frequent use of sign language than PECS • “Mixed verbal behavior” • Specific data collection procedures • Stimulus-Stimulus Pairing Procedure • Fluency training

  22. DTT and NET in AVB Programs(Sundberg & Partington, 1999)

  23. References • Carr, J.E., & Firth, A.M. (2006). The verbal behavior approach to early and intensive behavioral intervention for children with autism: A call for additional empirical support. Journal of Early and Intensive Behavior Intervention, 2, 18-27. • Carr, J. E., & Sidener, T. M. (2002). On the relation between applied behavior analysis and positive behavior support. The Behavior Analyst, 25, 245-253. • Cautilli, J. (2006). Validation of the verbal behavior package: Old wine new bottle - A reply to Carr and Firth (2005). The Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 81-92. • Halle, J. W. (1987). Teaching language in the natural environment: An analysis of spontaneity. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 12,28-37. • Horner, R.H., Carr, E.G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Council for Exceptional Children, 71, 165-179. • Koegel, R.L., Koegel, L.K., & Brookman, L.I. (2003). Empirically supported pivotal response interventions for children with autism. In A.E.Kazdin & J.R. Weisz (Eds.), Evidence-based psychotherapies for children and adolescents (pp. 341-357). New York: Guilford Press. • LeBlanc, L.A., Esch, J., Sidener, T.M., & Firth, A.M. (2006). Behavioral language interventions for children with autism: Comparing applied verbal behavior and naturalistic teaching approaches. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 22, 49-60. • Michael, J. (2004, August). B.F. Skinner’s elementary verbal relations. In ABA IV. Class conducted at the Pennsylvania State University Behavior Analysis Program. • Sautter, R.A., & LeBlanc, L.A. (2006). Empirical applications of Skinner’s analysis of verbal behavior with humans. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 22, 35-48. • Skinner, B.F. (1957). Verbal behavior. Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group. • Stokes, T. F., & Baer, D. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 349-367. • Sundberg, M.L. (2001). 301 research topics from Skinner’s book Verbal Behavior. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 9, 81-96. • Sundberg, M.L., & Michael, J. (2001). The benefits of Skinner’s analysis of verbal behavior for children with autism. Behavior Modification, 25, 698-724. • Sundberg, M.L., & Partington, J.W. (1998). Teaching language to children with autism and other developmental disabilities. Danville, CA: Behavior Analysts, Inc. • Sundberg, M.L., & Partington, J.W. (1999). The need for both discrete trial and natural environment language training for children with autism. In P.M. Ghezzi, W.L. Williams, & J.E. Carr (Eds.), Autism: Behavior analytic perspectives (pp. 139-156). Reno, NV: Context Press. • Barbera, M., & Rasmussen, T. (2007). The verbal behavior approach: How to teach children with autism and related disorders. Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

More Related