1. Tara Sheehan Florida International University
Training Rehearsal Strategies to Autistic Children Improves Discriminated Responding Controlled Jointly by Two Verbal Operants
Tara Sheehan
Florida International University

2. Special Thanks to Barry Lowenkron for his groundbreaking work on joint control, to Vincent Carbone for bringing Dr. Lowenkron’s work to my attention and to my mentor Jacob Gewirtz for his wisdom and guidance.

3. Why do this Research?
Children with autism have difficulty performing complex discrimination tasks.
Current educational interventions for autistic children focus on simple discrimination training utilizing manded stimulus selection procedures and fail to train more complex discriminations and responses that more closely mimic real life demands.
Recent researchers have questioned current methods of teaching autistic youth due to the almost sole emphasis on selection-based language training (Michael, 1985; Sundberg & Sundberg 1990; and Carbone, 2005).

4. Research Questions
The purpose of this study to test the efficacy of new teaching procedure designed to enable autistic youth to make complex discriminations (i.e.. discriminations over a time delay).
An additional aim of this study is to verify and extend the findings of Lowenkron (1984; 1988; 1989; 1991; 1998) on joint control and the findings of Michael (1985) and Sundberg (1990) on the differences between topography-based and selection-based verbal behavior. These research findings all have direct implications on language and educational interventions for children with autism.

5. Theoretical Perspective
The theoretical perspective for this research is Behavior Analytic.
More specifically, this research utilizes the theoretical framework and language outlined by B.F. Skinner in Verbal Behavior (1957).

6. Verbal Behavior
Skinner’s Verbal Behavior (1957) provided a comprehensive analysis of the conditions under which we speak.
Much basic research, applied research and clinical work have demonstrated the efficacy of Skinner’s account of verbal behavior (Bijou 1979, Catania 1980, Catania, Matthews & Shimoff 1982, Barnes 1990, Hayes & Hayes 1992, Fraley 1996, Horne & Lowe 1996, Bourret, Volmer & Rapp 2004, etc.).
In Fact, there is a journal titled The Analysis of Verbal Behavior which is exclusively dedicated to research based on the principles of Skinner’s VB.

7. Verbal Behavior
Verbal Behavior outlines a functional approach to studying language.
In Verbal Behavior, language is analyzed by its controlling environmental relations and not by its form or topography, as is done in traditional approaches to the study of language (i.e.. linguistics and cognitive psychology).
A unit of verbal behavior is “…an increased strength of a distinguishable topography given some controlling variable” (Michael 1985).
Skinner chose the verbal operant as the unit of analysis for studying verbal behavior.

8. Skinner’s Verbal Operants
Skinner divided verbal behavior into primary and secondary response classes.
Primary response classes include the verbal operants: echoic, mand, tact and intraverbal.
The secondary response class, Autoclitics, are verbal behavior that modify the primary response classes, depicting additional attributes or sources of control for the primary response class. Autoclitics can be utilized by the speaker to sharpen the effect of verbal behavior in the listener.

9. Verbal Operant: The Echoic
The echoic is a response to a verbal stimulus that has the same or similar sound pattern of the stimulus.
Speaker saying “dog” after hearing the verbal stimulus “dog”
Speaker signing “dog” after seeing the sign “dog”

10. Verbal Operant: The Mand
The mand is the only verbal operant that functions primarily to benefit the speaker (which is why it should be the first operant targeted in a language intervention program—Karelix).
A mand is a demand or request, evoking behavior from the listener.
The response form is controlled by a current learned or unlearned motivative variable (Michael 1982).

11. Verbal Operant: The Tact
The tact is a label for a nonverbal stimulus, the presence of which evokes a particular form of response.
Tacts can be referents of simple objects or complex, abstract stimuli.
A useful contrast between the mand and the tact is that “… the mand permits the listener to infer something about the speaker regardless of the external circumstances, while the tact permits him to infer something about the circumstances regardless of the condition of the speaker” (Skinner, 1957 p. 82).

12. Verbal Operant: The Intraverbal
The response form is controlled by a verbal stimulus.
An intraverbal response does not exhibit point-to-point correspondence to the stimulus (whereas the other verbal operants exhibit point-to-point correspondence with the referent). In other words, the parts of the stimulus are not formally related to parts of the response.
A speaker saying “dog” in response to the question “what animal barks?”
A speaker saying bird upon hearing tree.

13. Verbal Operant: The Autoclitic
Autoclitics are a form of verbal behavior that functions to supplement the expressive behavior of the speaker.
Autoclitics can assume many topographies:
Speed of response
Volume
Pointing
Words to describe controlling relations for other operants (i.e.. actually, I think)

14. Listener Behavior
Listener behavior or receptive language did not receive extensive coverage in Verbal Behavior mainly because receptive language or manded stimulus selection needs no special form of analysis beyond what we already know about behavior under stimulus control.
Possibly due to this lack of emphasis by Skinner and behavior analysts in general, cognitive and mentalistic explanations of understanding and word meaning have persisted with little opposing evidence being provided by behavior analysts (Carbone 2002).

15. Listener Behavior (cont)
A special form of stimulus control called joint control (Lowenkron 1984) appears to provide a behavioral explanation of understanding and word meaning.
This unique form of stimulus control provides an evidenced-based and conceptually systematic explanation that does not rely on cognitive process or higher order naming relation to explain the behavior.
Moreover, the analysis remains within the confines of Skinner’s analysis of verbal behavior and interactions among the verbal operants.

16. Listener Behavior (cont)
Joint control appears to have many important applications to the teaching of children with autism.
Recent research have explored the applications of joint control in teaching autistic youth (Carbone,Lewis, Louden, & Quinn, 2002; Gutierrez 2005; Phung 2005; & Tu 2005). These researchers have presented their findings at the Association for Behavior Analysts Conference.

17. Joint Control
Noticing a deficit in the behavioral literature, Barry Lowenkron experimentally studied listener behavior through direct observation.
To resolve the issue that stimulus control alone cannot explain GENERALIZED responding in selection-based behavior, he introduced the concept of joint control.
Lowenkron has demonstrated that without mediating verbal responses (echoic rehearsal), generalized responding is absent in matching to sample (1984), selection-based behavior (1991), and relational responding (1995 & 200): behavior traditionally conceptualized as receptive and non-verbal.
Examining the role of joint control in word-object relations obviates the need to rely on notion of symbolism or semantics.

18. Joint Control (cont)
Lowenkron defines the occurrence of joint control as “…when the currently rehearsed topography of a verbal operant, as evoked by one stimulus, is simultaneously evoked by another stimulus” (1998).
Joint control as an explanations for generalized responding is behaviorally sound because it is built upon the principle of stimulus control.
Joint control occurs when two discriminative stimuli act together to evoke a common response topography.

19. Let’s Try a Joint Control Skill
Find the number:
939173

20. Number Array
Find the number

21. Responding under joint control

22. Another example: Pentagons
  “On this next figure, the sample is the phrase black dot in a smaller pentagon.  Again, the comparisons are perused as the sample phrase is rehearsed as a self-echoic.  When a comparison is found that allows the same topography,  black dot in a smaller pentagon to be emitted both as a tact of the comparison,  and also as an echoic of the sample, the source of this joint echoic/tact control, the appropriate comparison,  is reported by an autoclitic pointing response.  Together, this example and the prior number-finding task illustrate the generic nature of joint control.  That is, the joint control event is independent of the properties of any particular stimuli: in these two cases it occurs when a tact and an echoic come to control the emission of a common topography regardless of the particulars of the topography” (Lowenkron 1999).

23. Method

24. Subjects Three boys (CB,AS,MM) between the ages of 5 and 8 years old
DSM diagnosis of autism
Observed behaviors denoting autism
Intermediate learners as defined by the ABLLS
Had a home therapy program of at least six hours a week.

25. Setting
Experimental sessions were conducted in the natural setting of the students’ home therapy sessions.
This arrangement was chosen to minimize stress on the participants, ensure accuracy of student responding and promote external validity.

26. Stimuli
All experimental materials were obtained from Lakeshore Learning Materials
Language Builder Cards
Teddy Bear Counters
Large Colored Blocks
Small Colored Blocks

27. Consequences Following a correct response:
Verbal praise
Edible Reinforcer
30 sec of television viewing
Following an incorrect response:
Learning material presented swiped
New trial presented
Following three consecutive incorrect responses, a trial with a mastered task presented. This procedure of interspersing difficult and easy demands prevents problem behavior by reducing the value of escape from the experimental teaching situation (Singer, Singer & Horner, 1987; Mace, Hock, Lalli, West, Belfiore, Pinter & Brown, 1988; Horner,Day, Sprague, O’Brien & Healthfield, 1991; Zarcone, Iwata, Huges & Vollmer, 1993).

28. Design Multiple Baseline across tasks (Baer, Wolf & Risley 1968).
Order of task conditions was varied to control for potential sequence effects.
The three participants were run concurrently, strengthening internal validity by controlling for historical events, participant maturation and exposure to experimental conditions (Carr 2005).

29. Experimental Tasks
Delayed Replication of a Sequence (B-15 in the ABLLS)
Delayed Finding a Sample (B-16 in the ABLLS)
Count Objects out of a Set (R-5 in the ABLLS)
Select Pictures from a Larger Set (C-26 in the ABLLS)

30. Task Presentation (Cont) Correct Response Consequence
Condition Title
ABLLS Goal
Task Presentation
Time Delay
Prompt Procedure
Task Presentation (Cont)
Correct Response
Consequence
Incorrect Response or No Response Consequence
Onset of Joint Control
Delayed finding a sample
B-16
The student is shown a picture for 3 seconds and instructed to “look.”
Picture is hidden for 5 seconds.
The student is verbally prompted to tact the picture and verbally rehearses the picture name.
The target picture and two distracter pictures are laid on the table. The student is instructed to “give me the same.”
Response is reinforced and next trial presented.
No reinforcement given. Materials are swiped and next trial is presented.
When the student’s rehearsal is emitted as both a self-echoic and as a tact resulting in the autoclitic response of handing the correct picture to the therapist.
Delayed Replication of a Sequence
B-15
The student is instructed to “look” at 3 items on a tale placed in a straight line. The items are left out for 8 seconds.
Items are hidden for 5 seconds
The student is verbally prompted to tact the items on the table and rehearse object names when objects removed.
The student is handed the 3 items and instructed to “make the same pattern.”
Response is reinforced and next trial presented
No reinforcement given. Materials are swiped and next trial is presented
When the student’s rehearsal is emitted both as a self-echoic and as a tact resulting in the autoclitic response of placing the objects in the correct order.
Selects Three Pictures from a Larger Set
B-17
C-26
The student is instructed to hand the therapist three specific pictures.
A 5 second delay is imposed before target are placed
The student is verbally prompted to verbally rehearse the three target pictures (no pictures present).rehearse the pattern.
Ten pictures are laid on a table. The student must select the correct three in order.
Response is reinforced and next trial presented Response is reinforced and next trial presented
When the student’s rehearsal is emitted both as a self-echoic and as a tact when picking up the correct items in the correct order out of the larger set.
Counting Objects out of a Set
R-5
A pile of objects is place on the table. The student is instructed to give the therapist a certain number of items.
Response is blocked for 5 seconds
The student is verbally prompted to tact the number and verbally rehearses the target number
The student is again instructed to give the specific number of items after the time delay.
When the student’s rehearsal is emitted both as a self-echoic and a tact when handing over the correct number of items and stopping.

31. Procedure Baseline Treatment Treatment Removal Maintenance
Experimental task presented. No additional prompt provided.
Treatment
The experimenter prompted vocal echoic rehearsal of the target stimuli. Three to five repetitions of the echoic rehearsal were required. Following the rehearsal prompt, the procedure was identical to baseline.
Treatment Removal
Echoic rehearsal prompt removed. Identical to baseline.
Maintenance
Identical to Baseline procedure. Conducted as weekly probes.

32. Data Collection and Reliability
The experimenter was the primary data recorder.
One member from each of the participants’ home therapy team was selected and trained to record data simultaneously and independently for the purpose of calculating inter-observer agreement.
Inter-observer agreement was 100% for all of the experimental sessions for which reliability was assessed.
Reliability was assessed one during baseline and twice during treatment for each experimental task, for each participant.

33. Results

34. Results
Baseline data was immediately stable across all three participants.
A correct response was never recorded for any of the participants during the baseline trials.
Each of the three participants could not perform any of the experimental tasks prior to implementation of the treatment phase.

36. Results- CB
The extended verification periods during which C-26 and B-16 was held in baseline provides sufficient evidentiary support for the effectiveness of the treatment variable (Baer, Wolf & Risley, 1968 and Carr 2005).
CB was observed to vocally rehearse the trial targets during every session in the prompt removal and maintenance phases.
CB learned to utilize the echoic rehearsal strategy to preserve the stimulus control of the task instructions while visually scanning the field.

37. Results- CB (cont)
The echoic rehearsal functioned as a self-management strategy since engaging in the echoic rehearsal responses made the response that solves the problem more likely (Palmer 1991 and Carbone 2002), enabling CB to respond under joint control.
CB was observed engaging in vocal echoic rehearsal in tasks not included in the experimental training, in which responding under joint control would be an important controlling variable for the response.
It appeared that CB generalized the echoic rehearsal to new tasks and environments.

39. Results- AS
AS demonstrated the same pattern of responding as CB, with each task remaining at 0 during baseline and improving rapidly once the treatment was introduced.
Again, the verification periods between experimental tasks were sufficient to verify treatment efficacy.
The variable data AS provided during experimental task B-16 was due to problem behavior during some experimental sessions.

40. Baseline

41. Results-MM
MM exhibited a very similar data pattern to that of CB and AS in which the first and second skill acquisition rate were not significantly different from one another and the third skill was acquired more quickly.
The aggregate of this pattern of responding across participants suggests some potential generalization of echoic rehearsal strategies in situations that require responding under joint control for task performance.
MM’s data was the most variable.
MM’s variable data can be directly attributed to his weak tact and echoic repertoires.

42. Results- MM
MM exhibited the highest error rate and his error types were recorded.
The types of errors MM made provide further evidence for the research hypothesis of verbal behavior mediating receptive task performance.
Oftentimes when MM was engaging in the prompted rehearsal, echoic control over his response would break down and he would rehearse an incorrect target.
If his incorrect echoic was able to come into joint control, he would chose the stimulus that allowed him to respond under joint control (echoic and tact).

43. Results- MM (cont)
MM’s error responding is further evidence that he was not responding under stimulus control of the instructions of the experimenter.
Instead, MM preserved (or changed) the stimulus control of the instructions through echoic rehearsal, and responded to the target stimuli under joint control.
MM’s error responding is a direct replication of a finding by Sundberg and Sundberg (1990) where they observed incorrect mediating responses resulting in an error in which the comparison for the mediating response was selected.

44. Discussion

45. Discussion- Treatment Efficacy
The echoic rehearsal treatment was effective in teaching children with autism to respond under joint control on some ABLLS tasks.
The students were unable to perform these receptive performance tasks until they utilized their verbal repertoires as mediating responses. Thus receptive language performance requires an expressive language repertoire.
Therefore, it appears that understanding word meanings (or put another way, being able to follow verbal instructions) or being able to select unique relations among stimuli without explicit teaching may be at least partially dependent upon the listener having a verbal behavior (expressive) repertoire.

46. Discussion- Mediating Responses
The verbal repertoire provides the listener with mediating responses which are necessary for joint control to occur and evoke the autoclitic or identifying response which reports that joint control has occurred.
The generalized response was not controlled by any single dimension of the stimuli but instead was controlled by the relations among verbal stimuli that interact to produce the jointly controlled response.
Thus, generalized responding is mediated by the occurrence of joint control and not characteristics of the stimuli involved.

47. Discussion- Supplementary Stimulation
For each of the trained skills in this experiment, in order to emit the correct response, the listener had to remember or preserve the question.
The echoic rehearsal functioned a supplementary stimulus control technique (Skinner 1957 & Palmer 1991) generated by the listener.
The echoic rehearsal was not a discriminative stimulus because the echoic alone could not occasion the response.
Using supplemental stimulation to solve problems is a learned strategy that can be applied to a variety of situations in varying complexity.

48. Discussion- Discriminating the Onset of Joint Control
When the participants responded under joint control, they were observed to emit the response with significant strength.
This strength was demonstrated through autoclitic processes including a loud voice, distinguishable tone, noted emphasis and the emission of a declarative response, signaling the completion of a given trial.
Through their emission of autoclitic responses, the participants demonstrated that they could discriminate the onset of joint control and its relation to the controlling variable (the experimenter’s instructions).
In essence, they knew they had emitted the correct response.

49. Discussion- Automatic Reinforcement
Since responding under joint control is discriminable by the organism, the emission of a response under joint control may be automatically reinforcing.
“Automatic reinforcement involves a strengthening effect that occurs without the deliberate consequential mediation of another person. But rather, as a result of an antecedent paring of a neutral stimulus with an established form of reinforcement, the neutral stimulus can acquire reinforcing value” (Sundberg et al. 1996, 22).
Through this paring process the onset of joint control itself may take on reinforcing properties.

50. Discussion- Implications
The present study has implications for designing interventions for children with autism.
Expressive repertoires should be taught first or at least concurrently with selection-based skill training.
Language training should focus on topography-based systems.
Self-management strategies should be trained to enable learners to generate their own supplemental stimulation to strengthen stimulus control and aide in problem solving.
Training responding under joint control can improve task performance in a variety of skills measured in the ABLLS.

51. Thank You