Teaching Intraverbal Behavior



Teaching Intraverbal Behavior

Mark L. Sundberg

January 25, 2006

DRAFT VERSION

Much of our day-to-day language involves emitting words, phrases and sentences that are in response to the words, phrases, and sentences of others. For example, if someone asks How are you, the tendency to say I’m fine is a type of language where the words of others function as the primary discriminative stimulus for other words. That is, How are you evokes I’m fine due to a verbal conditioning history. Skinner (1957) identifies this type of verbal behavior as intraverbal behavior, and suggests that it plays a major role in our daily language interactions. He also suggests that the intraverbal, like the other verbal operants are functionally independent from each other. By “functionally independent” Skinner means the ability to emit response related to one of the verbal operants (e.g., a tact) does not guarantee the ability to emit that same response in another (e.g., intraverbal). For example, a child may be able to say Ball when he wants a ball (mand), say Ball when he sees a ball (tact), and say Ball when someone else says Ball (echoic), but not able to say Ball when someone says What can you bounce? (intraverbal). A growing body of empirical research with both typical children and children with developmental disabilities, supports Skinner’s conceptual analysis of the independence of the intraverbal repertoire (e.g., Braam & Poling, 1982; Miguel, Carr, & Poindexter, 2005; Luciano, 1986; Partington & Bailey, 1993; Watkins, Pack-Texteria, & Howard, 1989).

In technical terms, the way the verbal operants differ from each other is mainly in what functions as an antecedent for each verbal response. The antecedent for the mand is motivation (MO), the antecedent for the tact is the physical environment (nonverbal discriminative stimuli), the antecedent for the echoic consists of words that match the words of the relevant response (verbal discriminative stimuli with point-to-point correspondence with the verbal response), and the antecedent for the intraverbal consists of words that do not match the words of the relevant response (a verbal discriminative stimulus that does not have point-to-point correspondence to the response). The intraverbal relation is closest to the echoic relation in that both verbal operants involve antecedents that are verbal discriminative stimuli, however, in echoic relation the response matches the antecedent, whereas in intraverbal relation the response does not match the verbal stimulus (see Table XXX, See appendix).

Intraverbal behavior can be observed in many typical verbal interactions between people. Perhaps some of the most obvious types of intraverbals involve answering the questions of others. For example, if a parent asks What did you do at school today? And a child answers A fireman came into our classroom and talked to us. The answer to the parent’s question is intraverbal because the antecedent that evokes the child’s response was a verbal stimulus that did not match the child’s verbal response (the question asked by the parent would be classified as a mand). Some intraverbal behavior is very simple and even trivial such as producing the sounds of animals when asked to do so (e,g., saying Meow when someone says A kitty says....). While other intraverbal interactions are extremely complex such as answering questions with multiple components and advanced content (e.g., Can you explain a modified quadratic equation?). The current chapter will describe a variety of procedures for teaching intraverbal behavior and suggest a general order for training. The sequence of intraverbal skills (the curriculum) presented in this chapter follows the same type of analysis presented for tact training in that the focus is on the increasing complexity of the relevant types of stimulus control and the increasingly complex responses that they evoke. This analysis suggests that verbal stimulus control and the related intraverbal responses can, to some degree, be viewed on a continuum with simple types of control and responses being easier to establish than more complex types of control. As with tacting, establishing easier forms of stimulus control seems to set the stage for the establishment of more complex types of control.

Establishing early intraverbal behavior

The acquisition of intraverbal behavior by typically developing children can provide a general guide for the sequencing of an intraverbal curriculum for children with language delays. The first question is when do typical children begin to acquire intraverbal behavior, and the second question is what types of intraverbal behavior do they acquire? Clearly, intraverbal behavior is not the first type of verbal behavior acquired by typical children. It was suggested previously that the mand is the first type of verbal behavior acquired (usually in the form of crying), followed by echoic, receptive, and tacting skills (not necessarily in that order). Intraverbal stimulus control is often a more difficult type of control to establish (see below), and it is reasonable that verbal responses would first come under of motivation and nonverbal visual stimuli. However, some types of intraverbal control are relatively simple and some children acquire a few intraverbal responses shortly after a few spoken mands and tacts are acquired (typically around 12-14 months). For example, many children learn to provide the sounds that favorite animals make when asked to do so, fill-in-the blanks of favorite songs, or fill-in-the-blanks related to favorite activities. The word “favorite” suggests that motivate variables and perhaps automatic reinforcement may be at work here and share control over the behavior with the verbal stimulus (i.e., multiple control). Nonetheless, these early types of verbal stimulus control can begin to set the stage for more advance types of verbal stimulus control.

Starting intraverbal training for children with autism

In general, formal intraverbal training should not be a part of an intervention program for a child with autism until the mand and tact repertoires are established, and the child can emit good echoic, imitation, receptive, and matching-to-sample behavior. That is, the first six basic language and learning skills should be the focus of an intervention program prior to adding formal intraverbal training. There certainly are exceptions, and an individual analysis of each child can provide guidance as to when intraverbal training should begin and what form it should take. For example, some children do acquire intraverbal responses before tacting, and intraverbal prompts can be used to establish tacts (Sundberg, Endicott, & Eigenheer, 2001). While it is true that some children begin to acquire a few intraverbal responses shortly after one year of age, they are relatively trivial (e.g., animal sounds) and often emerge with very little formal training (perhaps due to the effects of pairing and automatic reinforcement). The recommendation here is that there is no harm in trying to establish these same types of intraverbal behaviors and they may be of ultimate value to a child with language delays, but if they are hard to establish for an individual child intraverbal training should be put aside until the six basic repertoires are stronger (see the section on “red flags” below).

Formal intraverbal training seems to work best for a child who can easily emit a number of different mands, tacts, and receptive discrimination skills. As far as how many, it is difficult to put a specific number on these, but as a general guideline the mand repertoire should involve a variety of different mands (10 might be a reasonable number, but some children may be successful at intraverbal training with fewer mands), and come easily for a child. The tact repertoire should involve at least 50 different tacts, some of which should include verbs (again, however, some children may acquire intraverbal behavior without this number of tacts, while other may do better with more tacts). An individual analysis is required to determine what is best for a specific child, and that child’s successes and failures (red flags) will provide the relevant data for decision making. In addition to mand and tact skills, echoic (or imitation skills for those who use sign language) should be strong, as well as matching-to-sample skills. Finally, it may be helpful, but not necessary for early intraverbal training, that the child be able to show some success with RFFC procedures. Certainly, success with RFFC procedures will ultimately play a major role in advancing a child’s intraverbal skills, but may not be necessary for early intraverbal training.

Level 1 intraverbal training: Teaching the first intraverbal responses

The simplest types of intraverbal behaviors are the same as those that occur early for many typical children. Providing the sounds that animals make and filling-in the missing words from songs and common phrases are often easy to teach, and have the effect of beginning to teach a child to make a non-echoic response to a verbal stimulus. There are several ways to teach intraverbal behavior, but most involve the same basic teaching procedures described for the other forms of verbal behavior (i.e., behavior modification procedures). For these early intraverbal responses, echoic prompting and fading procedures may work best (Table 8-1). First present the target verbal stimulus such as A kitty says..., then provide an immediate echoic prompt (Meow), and pre-present the target verbal stimulus and delay the echoic prompt (the transfer trial). Reinforce a correct response (Meow) with praise or an opportunity to mand. Incorrect responses (e.g., the child echos A kitty says...) should be followed by repeating the trial with the slightly delayed prompt and attempting to more carefully time and fade the echoic prompt (e.g., partial prompts, reduce volume, reduce delays). If errors continue, try reversing the intraverbal to Meow says a... and use a tact prompting and fading procedure. Specifically, instead of echoic prompts, use a picture of a cat as a prompt (tact) and fade out that prompt using the standard prompting, fading, and transfer of stimulus control procedures. If errors still continue, try a few other animal sounds, and if still the child is not successful discontinue this type of intraverbal training for a while (perhaps a month or two). Some children, however, may be successful with song fill-ins, despite failing to acquire animal sounds and the procedures described below should also be tried.

Table 8-1

Echoic to intraverbal transfer with animal sounds.

________________________________________________________________________

Antecedent Behavior Consequence

Target verbal stimulus (A kitty says...) Meow Praise

Echoic prompt (Meow)

It is often quite easy to teach a child to intraverbally respond to part of a song with a fill-in type response, especially if it is a reinforcing song such as one that comes from a favorite TV show or video. For example, if a child finds Sponge Bob reinforcing and watches the TV show or video frequently, he may be able to correctly fill-in Sponge Bob Square.... with Pants. If this response can be evoked in the absence of the nonverbal stimulus of Sponge Bob and his square pants it can be classified as intraverbal. Again, it may not be a very sophisticated type of intraverbal relation, yet it is intraverbal nonetheless. In addition, it is possible that a child could get this intraverbal correct, but not be able to tact pants or receptively discriminate pants for other items, especially clothing items. However, this activity can still have value in that it begins to teach a child to differentially respond to verbal discriminative stimuli. If a child fails to provide the correct intraverbal response, an echoic or tact prompting procedure should be tried. Obviously, the tact procedure will only work if the child can tact Bob’s pants. For both procedures present the target verbal stimulus (Sponge Bob square....) with a delay between the verbal stimulus and the target response and with a facial expectation prompt to the child (e.g., the trainer has a questioning look on her face), then say Pants. On the next trial (transfer trial) further delay the Pants prompt (but keep the facial prompt) and reinforce a correct response with praise of the opportunity to mand. An incorrect response should be followed by reducing the delay between the two verbal stimuli, and by using more careful prompting and fading steps. Correct responses should be followed by slowly fading the all the prompts. If the child continues to fail, try the procedure in the context of the TV show or movie (multiple control by adding in nonverbal prompts), or try a few other songs. If these interventions fail, put this type of training on hold for a period of time (perhaps one or two months) then try again later.

Table 8-2

Echoic or tact to intraverbal transfer with a song fill-in.

________________________________________________________________________

Antecedent Behavior Consequence

Target verbal stimulus (Sponge Bob square... pants Praise

Echoic or tact prompt (Pants/pants)

Fun activities can also be used as a source of verbal stimuli for early intraverbal development. For example, if a child enjoys playing peek-a-boo during the game the trainer can present the verbal stimulus Peek-a and delay boo, followed by a echoic prompt, transfer trial, and essentially the same teaching and correction procedure described above for song fill-ins. If a child responds Boo it is most likely part mand and part intraverbal (it could also be part tact, in that the child might be attending to the hands covering the trainer’s face). The intraverbal source of stimulus control will become more established when a second game is added that involves a second verbal stimulus and a different response. For example, if the child enjoys being spun in a chair the trainer could say Spin the... and delay the word chair. Using the echoic prompt and transfer procedure it may be possible to evoke the response chair from the child. Successful switching between Spin the and Peek a will begin to make verbal stimulus control more apparent. It may not be unexpected for the child say boo when the training says Spin the... This type of error indicates that verbal stimuli have not yet acquired a discriminative function and further training is required. A similar type of “overgeneralization” (and failure to discriminate) error might be observed in early tact training when a child identifies a new item with a response related to a previously trained item (e.g., after learning to tact shoe, he calls a car shoe). Additional fun activities can be added and interspersed with the other intraverbal activities that the child has shown some success with. It is important to note that these early intraverbal responses may be multiply controlled, especially with the fun activities exercises, but at some point it will be important to break the response free from these additional sources of control. A measure of intraverbal development is necessary and can be provided by periodic cold probes (first trial data) on just the intraverbal relations.

In-context intraverbal fill-ins.

Multiple sources of control can be additive in their evocative effects (Skinner, 1957). Having two or three reasons to get something done often results in getting it done. The same general strategy has been applied to many elements of early language training program. Early mand training involved using the nonverbal stimuli of the physical environment, verbal prompts, and other sources of control to initially evoke mands, but clearly acknowledging that these mands are multiply controlled. Ultimately for these mands to be most effective for a child, a trainer would need to break the responses free from these additional sources of control (even though these sources may have been partly responsible for the initial acquisition of antecedent control). With early intraverbal training it was suggested above that motivate variables be used in additional to verbal stimuli to help establish antecedent control over specific verbal behaviors. Nonverbal stimuli in the physical environment can also be helpful in establishing intraverbal control. An early type of multiply controlled intraverbal behavior for typically developing children involves talking about on-going daily activities and routines such as eating, dressing, traveling, bathing, and cleaning. For example, a parent may be dressing a child and say Let’s put on your socks. This context and verbal stimulus may evoke the response Put on shoes from the child as a response that is part mand, part tact, part echoic, and part intraverbal. The procedure suggested below is designed to capitalize on these same variables to formally teach some early types of intraverbal behavior.

A specific context typically involves a variety of nonverbal stimuli that evoke some specific behaviors. For example, standing in front of a sink may evoke turning on the faucet, putting ones hands in the water, reaching for soap, turning off the water, reaching for a towel, and drying one’s hands. Often it is the case that a parent will accompany this activity with relevant verbal behavior such as Wash your hands. These verbal stimuli are often consistently correlated with the sink and water and may provide an opportunity for implementing the following intraverbal training procedure. In the context of the sink, water and a bar of soap, the trainer should say Wash your..., after a brief delay (1-2 seconds) then say hands. Prompt the child to emit the echoic response hands and represent the verbal stimulus Wash your... and increase the delay slightly. Reinforce the verbal response hands if the child emits it without the echoic prompt. If the echoic prompt and fading procedure does not result in the child filling in the blank, use a tact prompting procedure where the training points to the child’s hands after the verbal stimulus wash your.... If this evokes the tact hands begin to fade the pointing prompt. If this still fails to evoke the response combine the echoic and tact prompting procedures. The goal is to bring the response hands under the multiple control of the visual context of the sink, etc., and the verbal stimulus Wash your....

Intraverbal control can be further developed in two ways. One way is to conduct cold probes on the target intraverbal relation. In the absence of the sink present the verbal stimulus You wash your.... If it evokes the response hands reinforce the behavior and record it as an intraverbal relation. Stronger intraverbal development will be the result of some additional training procedures. Clearly, rote responding must be avoided (see below) and it is certainly possible that the sink may acquire strong control over the response hands (see the “red flags” described below). In order to prevent this, a second verbal stimulus should be introduced as soon as possible. In the same context of the sink, but now with some slight visual changes where, for example the water is not turned on, the trainer says Turn on the... and using the same prompting and fading procedure described above, tries to evoke the response water from the child. Once this response is acquired the two different verbal stimuli Wash your.... and Turn on the... can be interspersed with each other along with distracter trials consisting of tacts relevant to the context, and mands when appropriate. A third verbal stimulus can be added such as You dry with a...., or Turn off the..., You wash with soap and..., .etc. The goal of this training is to get as many different intraverbal/tact responses as possible so that the nonverbal stimuli (the physical environmental context) don’t dominate as a source of control. That is, the correct verbal response emitted at the sink is dependent more on the verbal stimuli presented by the trainer then the visual stimuli in the physical environment. Once the child can fill-in a variety of opened ended statements in the context of the sink, intraverbal control not only become more apparent, but provides another activity to strengthen this important form of verbal behavior. The various verbal stimuli should occasionally be presented out of the sink context in order to determine if pure intraverbal control is emerging. Following some success (or failure) with one context, additional training should be conducted with other contexts and common routines.

Expanding, strengthening, and measuring the early intraverbal repertoire

The animal sounds, song fill-ins, fun activities, and in-context fill-ins intraverbal training procedures can be expanded in a variety of ways. Adding new animal sounds, song fill-ins, and more fun activities is one way to expand and strengthen the intraverbal repertoire. For animal sounds, some sounds are more common than others (e.g., those of a cat, dog, cow, pig, duck, horse, bear, monkey, owl) and it may be easier to use these as intraverbal relations. These types of intraverbals are not very useful in the long run for a child, but they do begin to teach a child to differentially response to verbal stimuli with a verbal response, and are often fun and easy to do. As mentioned previously, the animal sounds and names can and should be reversed as early as possible to further establish verbal stimulus control. The goal at this point in early training is to establish that different verbal stimuli evoke different, but specific verbal responses, much in the same manner that different pictures and objects (nonverbal stimulus control) come to evoke different tacts. The teaching format should be similar to that described for the previous verbal operants (i.e., mixed VB, opportunities to mand as reinforcers, specific teaching sessions natural environment trials, etc.). For expanding songs, not only can new songs be added, but additional words can be dropped out and use as fill-in’s in other parts of the songs. For example, Sponge...., or, Who lives in a pinnapple under the...., or, Who lives in a... For fun activities, in addition to adding new activities, some the words can be reversed such as, In a chair you....spin.

Generalization is also important in early intraverbal training. Therefore, variation in the activities should occur as soon as possible. Training should be conducted in different locations, with different people, at differet times of day, different materials, different tones of voice, etc. For example, the spinning in a chair activity should be done in different chairs with different people, in different settings, with verbal reversals, and with the verbal stimuli being presented in different manners, such as changing the intonation, prosidy, etc., and with different carrier phrases (e.g., Let’s spin the...; How about if we spin the...; I’m going to spin the...; Spin the...). The target intraverbal relation is that the verbal stimulus Spin should acquire a discrimintive function (verbal stimulus control) over the verbal response chair (the response is also part mand and part tact at this point, but that is okay in this early training), and not the tone of voice, person, carrier phrase, specific chair, etc. If these irrelevant stimuli acquire a discriminative fuction (they are what evokes the response Spin) the verbal behavior established could be identified as rote, and this is not the direction early intraverbal training should procede. If it appears that the child’s new intraverbal responses are, or are becoming rote, steps must be taken to change this, ot it may be best to set aside intraverbal raining for a period of time (see below).

The measurement of intraverbal behavior is extremently important and can serve a guide as to when and how the intraverbal repertoire should be expanded, or training put on hold if necessary. First-trial probe data on the target intraverbal relations should be conducted on a regular basis. An individualized data sheet should be set up for the child that contains the specific targets, including reversals (see appendix 2 for samples). It also may be important to collect data on the various elements of generalization (e.g., different people, different carrier phrases). For most children once a day should be sufficient. However, more frequent probing, or a last trial probe on the targets may provide additional measures of progress that might be benificial for some learners. The monitoring and measurement of errors is also important to determine if the intraverbal repertoire is developing appropriately. There are a variety of red flags that might be observed in early training that should be attended to by trainers and ameliorated in some way.

Defective intraverbal development

Steady acquisition of new intraverbal relations is typically a good sign that a child has the appropriate prerequisite skills for intraverbal training. However, there are a variety of errors and behavior patterns that should alert the trainers to potential problems. First, if it takes a lot of training trials to establish even a few simple intraverbals such as animal sounds it may be too early for formal training sessions. Defining “a lot of training trials” is hard to do for each individual learner. However, by the time a child reaches the level where intraverbal training is appropriate for him, he should have a well-established history of learning other simpler skills such as mands, tacts, and RDs. This history should establish for the trainer a measure of the child’s ability to acquire new verbal behaviors with the basic prompting, fading, and transfer of stimulus control procedures. For example, if the child still has difficultly acquiring simple tacts with an echoic to a nonverbal stimulus transfer procedure, intraverbal training may not be appropriate. If the child can successfully acquire new behavior with echoic prompting and transfer, then he should have the necessary prerequisite exposure to the procedures to be successful with the transfer to verbal stimuli. The number of training trials for new intraverbal relations may initially be more than those for tacts, but if it is exceedingly more (perhaps 5 to 10 sessions of training without success), training should be put on hold.

“Rote” responding is defined by The American Heritage Dictionary as “a memorizing process using routine or repetition without full comprehension; mechanical, routine; unthinking repetition.” This is not what the intraverbal repertoire should look like. If fact, it is the opposite. In Skinner’s book Verbal Behavior, Chapter 17 is titled “Thinking” and much of what Skinner defines as thinking is intraverbal behavior. Problem solving, analyzing, concluding, reframing, understanding, all involve intraverbal behavior. This level of intraverbal behavior is clearly not the target of the current chapter, but the goal is to move in the direction of typical intraverbal development, such that ultimately a child can “think” much in the same way that a typical child thinks. Thus, the trainers of early intraverbal behavior should be cautious about teaching rote responses. However, this is often difficult because some intraverbal relations do resemble rote responses in that there is only one correct answer and it should be memorized, and emitted with minimal “thinking.” For example, the verbal stimulus What’s your name? should always evoke the same name for a specific child. This response may technically be “rote” in that the child may not understand at all what “name” means other than when that verbal stimulus occurs in the context described above emitting a specific verbal response gets reinforced. Many early intraverbal relations are rote such as song fill-ins where a child can provide the correct response (e.g., sea to the verbal stimulus Who lives in a pineapple under the...”), but may not understand what sea means. Is this good or bad? It is good in that it begins to establish early verbal stimulus control, but bad in that this verbal relation is in danger of becoming problematic if other training procedures are not soon incorporated. These other procedures consist of the various reversal, generalization, and additional verbal operant training procedures described above. There will be further elaborated on below.

Understanding and thinking are complex types of behaviors that can involve a number of different behavioral repertoires (Skinner, 1974, 1957). At a basic level they involve being able to emit a specific and generalized response in each of the different verbal repertoires. For example, a child may be able to emit the word sea under the circumstances described above, but could it be said that he “understands or comprehends what sea means”? This more advanced level of behavior could be demonstrated by the ability to tact sea, mand for sea, receptively discriminate sea when asked to do so, and receptively identify sea in a variety of RFFC tasks. If a child can emit all of these behaviors and under a wide variety of generalized circumstances, he is approaching a better understanding of sea, yet obviously his “understanding” is still far from that of an oceanographer. Thus, there are many different levels of understanding and achieving complete understanding might be quite elusive. However, the goal of early intraverbal training is more to set the stage for more advanced intraverbals (e,g., conversation, verbal knowledge, academics), and avoiding rote responding is essential to this ultimate goal.

The identification of potentially problematic rote responding if often obvious. For example, if the child learns to say his name when asked What’s your name?, but when asked What’s his name? while pointing to a favorite character (e.g., Sponge Bob), the child emits his own name. However, if the verbal stimulus is changed to, for example Who is that? The child emits the correct response. Thus, the verbal stimulus name has acquired too strong (rote) stimulus control over a response, and may prevent the establishment of necessary conditional discriminations. That is, the pronoun his needs to alter the evocative effect of name, but in this example the strong stimulus control established may block the establishment of the conditional discrimination. In lay terms, the child does not “hear” (understand) his and automatically (rote) responds with the intraverbal relation established between the verbal stimulus name and his own name. If this simple intraverbal relation becomes too strong, it may be difficult to break the rote intraverbal responding and establish the ultimate repertoire for naming people and things.

Specifically, with this type of WH question the ultimate skill in providing the names of people and things really needs to be multiply controlled by both tact and intraverbal variables. When the verbal stimulus What’s his name? is presented to a child his should also evoke attending to a nonverbal stimulus (Sponge Bob) and tacting that stimulus. Thus, Sponge Bob is controlled both by the verbal stimuli his name and the nonverbal stimulus of Sponge Bob. This type of analysis (a verbal behavior analysis) allows trainers to more carefully analyze language development and be more cautious about crediting a child with a skill (e.g., knowing his name) when in fact, it is rote response, and not the same repertoire that a typically developing child my possess. It still may be beneficial to teach a child to be able to say his name under these simple intraverbal circumstances, but it is important to recognize this skill for what it is, and is not. This intraverbal task exemplifies the true complexities and difficulties involved in teaching responding to WH questions. The recommendation here is that these types of verbal questions should be put on hold, and not be the focus of intervention until the child has the necessary prerequisite skills. When and how to introduce WH and other types of questions will be presented later in the curriculum sequence.

There are a variety of other red flags to look for in early intraverbal training. Negative behavior may be an indication that the task is too difficult, the prompting steps are too abrupt, the available reinforcers have weaken due to the increased response effort, or the curriculum is out of sequence for a particular child. It is not uncommon to encounter children who will only exhibit negative behaviors (e.g., starring into space, falling on the floor, crying, aggression, SIB) when presented with a specific task such as intraverbal trials, but will not emit these behaviors when presented with known tacts, RDs, or MTS trials. If a trainer can reliably predict that negative behaviors will occur when starting intraverbal trials, a more careful functional analysis should be conducted, the behavior analyzed, and the appropriate changes made. These change may involve adjusting the curriculum sequence, changing the type of prompt, such as using tact prompts instead of echoic prompts, increasing the reinforcement, or set training aside for a while.

Additional red flags to look during training may involve long latencies between the verbal stimulus and a response, very low retention of trained responses, failure to totally break free from visual (tact/RFFC) or echoic prompts, or the failure to generalize the newly acquire behaviors to new persons, places, time, etc. It is important that these red flags be identified early in training and the appropriate adjustment made before the behaviors (e.g., rote responding, tantrums, prompt dependency) become too strong.

Associations???

Level 2 intraverbal training: RFFC to intraverbal transfer of stimulus control procedures)

Prior to moving on the Level 2 types of intraverbal training, the child should have demonstrated good success with the level 1 procedures. These activities should be continued with new intraverbal relations, but eventually the program should progress to the more advanced type of intraverbal training presented below. In addition, the child should be able to emit well over 100 nouns and verbs as tacts and receptive discriminations, have strong mands, echoics, and MTS skills, and be showing success with the RFFC training procedures described in the previous chapter (at least 100 different RFFC relations). If a child shows significant problems with the procedures described below (red flags), then training should be put on hold until his RFFC skills and other earlier types of verbal behavior are stronger. The goal of this more advanced type of intraverbal training (Levels 2-6) is to expand the content and variation of the verbal stimuli and the verbal responses emitted by the child. A primary focus is on the development of verbal stimulus classes where a child learns that several different verbal stimuli (e.g., fruit, peel, a monkey likes...) can evoke the same word (banana). The focus is also on the development of responses classes where a single verbal stimulus (peel) can evoke several different responses (e.g., banana, orange, tangerine). Additional goals include continuing to work on breaking intraverbal behavior free for dependence on motivational and nonverbal sources of control, while establishing more fluent and lucid intraverbal repertoires.

The careful selection of the target words is as important in developing the intraverbal as it was in the development of the mand, tact, and receptive repertoires. Select words that are already strong in the child’s repertoire as tacts and receptive relations, including RFFC relations. For example, if the target intraverbal relation is Socks when asked the question What do you wear on your feet? Make sure the child can tact and RD socks, feet, and wear. In addition, the child should be able to correctly emit the RFFC responses related to the targeted item (i.e., You wear shoes and....; child selects socks), and tact the item as he is making an RFFC response (i.e., the child tacts Socks as he selects a picture of socks from the RFFC array). If the child emits the tact of the item without any additional prompts this is usually a good indicator that he is ready for the transfer from RFFC to intraverbal procedure. If he fails to tact the item this can often be easily taught by prompting a tact (e.g., pointing to the target picture and saying Right, you wear shoes and...), then fading that prompt. Regarding the verb wear, for some children just being able to RD the verb may be enough of a prerequisite. For example, if a child can correctly respond to the verbal stimulus Show me wearing sock, as contrasted with say Pick up the sock, he may be successful with the RFFC to IV procedure. On the other hand some children may do fine without this skill and other may require both the tact and RD to be successful. However, as always, an individual child analysis of acquisition and errors will provide the relevant information.

Step 1: Conduct an intraverbal probe on the target relations

When first starting the RFFC to IV transfer procedure target at least two new intraverbal relations and intersperse them with previously acquired tasks (i.e., RFFC, RD, or tact trials). Following the acquisition of one of the intraverbal relations add new targets one or two at a time. The primary data for measuring the acquisition of new intraverbal responses for this procedure consists of first-trial cold probes (Table 8-1). Prior to any training trials on that specific intraverbal relation (at the beginning of a specific teaching session), present the child with the target verbal stimulus (e.g., You wear shoes and....). Record the data on the RFFC to IV data sheet (see sample data sheet 23 in Appendix 2). These probe trials should be presented in a mixed VB format (i.e., intersperse the probe trials with previously mastered verbal trials). Correct responses should be immediately reinforced, and incorrect responses followed by the RFFC correction/transfer procedure described below (i.e., reinforce and teach during probe trials). Typically, first-trial probes need only be conduced once each session for each intraverbal relation, however with some learners, a last-trial probe may also provide useful information.

Table 8-1

First-trial intraverbal probe.

________________________________________________________________________

Antecedent Behavior Consequence

Verbal stimulus (You wear shoes and...) Socks Praise

Step 2: RFFC trials using fill-in-the-blank verbal stimuli.

Select the target verbal relations (e.g., shoes and socks, and eat and popcorn), and begin with an RFFC trial using a messy array of at least 5 or 6 items. Some children may require a smaller or neat array, but by this time in the language training program a child should be a good scanner and capable of working with more advanced arrays (see Chapter 4). RFFC trials can be interspersed with known tacts and RDs related to the array for purposes of conducting mixed VB trials. The RFFC trial consists of presenting the child with the array of pictures and the verbal stimulus (e.g., You wear shoes and...) Correct RFFC responses should be reinforced with praise, and incorrect responses errorlessly corrected using the procedures described previously in the RFFC chapter.

Table 8-2

RFFC trial.

________________________________________________________________________

Antecedent Behavior Consequence

Verbal stimulus (You wear shoes and...) Select socks/says Socks Praise

Large messy array with socks in the array

Step 3: Fade out the nonverbal stimulus (the picture)

Following a correct RFFC trial (e.g., “You wear shoes and....”), praise the response and remove the visual array of stimuli by covering up the target picture, or sliding the array away from the child (Table 8-3). Then, after a few seconds of delay, present the target fill-in verbal stimulus (e.g., You wear shoes and.....). Reinforce a correct response with the opportunity to obtain a highly preferred item (e.g., a mand trial). Follow an incorrect response with a correction procedure consisting of returning the array of pictures and a re-presentation of the verbal stimulus. On the next trial following an error trial, present smaller steps in the fading procedure (e.g., leave the array out and just partially cover the target stimulus with a hand). It is also important to introduce a second target intraverbal relation as soon as possible. For example, You eat.... with a food item, as well as socks in the array. The point is to establish a verbal discrimination repertoire similar to the nonverbal discrimination repertoire established with tact training. As the child begins to emit several correct responses on the transfer trials, praise each correct responses, but begin to increase the number of correct responses required for a mand trial (i.e., begin to move to intermittent reinforcement).

Table 8-3

RFFC to IV transfer trial.

________________________________________________________________________

Antecedent Behavior Consequence

Verbal stimulus (You wear shoes and...) Socks Praise

Large messy array with socks in the array

Step 4: Add a distracter trial

If the child consistently provides a correct IV response when the pictures are removed, then begin to include a distracter trial for that relation. These trials can involve any of the known verbal or RD responses (i.e., tacts, echoics, RFFCs), but should not involve the target verbal response. That is, after the child has responded Socks, don’t use a tact of socks as a distracter trial. These distracter trials will help to strengthen the newly formed verbal stimulus control. In a sense, this may be considered a type of “memory training.” If the child is successful with one distracter, reinforce with a mand trial, and try adding additional distracters on successive trials. If errors occur after distracter trials, try using only tasks that involve non-vocal responses as distracters, such as imitative or RD trials. When an error does occur in the IV transfer trial, re-present the picture and the verbal stimulus, fade out the picture, re-present a non-vocal distracter, and then the IV trial. If errors continue to occur, provide more RFFC to IV training without a distracter trial, but begin to gradually increase the delay between the RFFC trial and the IV trial.

Step 5: Generalization, multiple exemplars, and reverse fill-ins

A primary goal of early intraverbal training is to avoid the establishment of rote responding. There are several procedures that can help to offset rote responding and move toward the establishment of an intraverbal repertoire that is more similar to that of a typically developing child. The concept of generalization has been presented earlier in the establishment of the other verbal repertoires and it is certainly a key element of intraverbal training. The two types of generalization, stimulus generalization and response generalization can also be applied to verbal stimuli and to intraverbal responses. Table 8-5 presents the concept of stimulus classes and response classes as they relate to the intraverbal relation. A verbal stimulus class as presented in the RFFC chapter involves teaching a child to respond to the same item with a variety of different verbal stimuli. For example, the child learns to touch a shoe under the control of the different verbal stimuli feet, sock, Nike, etc. These stimuli all form a class of stimuli that evoke the same behavior. Verbal response classes consist of relations where a variety of different responses are controlled by one verbal stimulus. For example, the single word Shoe can evoke the response sock, foot, or Nike. The focus on classes of stimuli and responses helps to prevent any single stimulus and response relation from becoming too strong, and possibly rote.

Table 8-4

Intraverbal stimulus and response classes.

Antecedent Behavior

Stimulus class

SD1

SD2 R1

SD3

SD4

SD5

Response Class

R1

R2

SD1 R3

R4

R5

In addition to the other elements of generalization presented in the mand chapter (e.g., provide training in different settings, at different times, with different people, etc.), stimulus and responses classes should be established quite early in training. The first and perhaps easiest step is to begin to develop responses classes. The concept of multiple exemplars (Greer, Engleman) is relevant here and suggests that teaching should involve establishing a variety of responses under the same type of verbal stimulus control. For the RFFC to IV transfer procedure, this can be accomplished by providing a wide variation of pictures in the array that would be considered correct responses to the target verbal stimulus. For example, if the target stimulus is You eat..., then several different foods should be rotated through the array, as opposed to always using the same food item (this type of training should have already occurred during RFFC training). Thus, each RFFC to IV trial can involve different responses to the verbal stimulus You eat... For some children the addition of different exemplars might be slow (use individual errors analysis as a guide), but for those who are successful it is important to keep changing the target responses. The targets however, should already be strong in the child’s repertoire as tacts and RDs. But, it is not uncommon for a child to select, for example, a food item even though he might not know the tact of it (e.g., boc choy). This occurs also through the process of generalization. Thus, for some children, it might be an advantage to include items that go beyond their existing tact and RD repertoires.

Another procedure that can help to establish generalized repertoires is to reverse the target verbal stimulus and the target verbal response. The basic concept of the reversed fill-in procedure is to exchange the order of the two primary verbal stimuli in the intraverbal relation. Instead of saying You wear shoes and..., the instructor now says You wear socks and... The purpose of this procedure is to decrease the chances of establishing rote responses by introducing variations of the verbal stimuli and target verbal response as early as possible in the intraverbal training program. New intraverbals that involve a verbal relation between two nouns (e.g., shoes and socks) can take advantage of a reversed RFFC procedure. The procedure consists of conducting an RFFC trial with the reversed relation followed by a transfer to IV trial. All the procedures for reinforcement and correction are the same as those described above. This RFFC to intraverbal procedure will not work for intraverbal relations that involve a verb as the antecedent and a noun as the response because you can’t easily place the verb in the RFFC array (e.g., A bike is something you...ride). A picture of riding a bike could be used, but technically it is not a verb and a correct response may be controlled by the wrong variables. With the verb-noun relation echoic prompts can be used instead of RFFC/visual prompts in the reversed fill-in procedure. This procedure would consist of presenting a food item as the verbal stimulus (e.g., A banana is something you...), reinforce correct responses, and correct errors with an echoic prompting, fading, and transfer procedure (i.e., ...eat. A banana is something you...).

The establishment of verbal stimulus classes is another element of intraverbal training that can be quite helpful in avoiding rote intraverbal responding. For example, if a child is successful with the procedures described above and can respond with Shoes when asked You wear socks and..., and vice versa, a third noun can be added (e.g., feet). Along with a picture of feet and the verbal stimulus You wear shoes on your..., or You wear shoes and socks on your.... After successful inclusion of feet as a response the relations between these words can be further expanded by using feet as a verbal stimulus, attempting to evoke socks or shoes as a verbal response (e.g., On your feet you wear...).

Verb-noun classes can be expanded by using the echoic prompting procedure described above, but may occur a little later in training, and be dependent on the child’s history of correct multiple verb-noun tacting and receptive discriminations (e.g., tacting bouncing ball as well as rolling ball). If the child can successful tact and RD multiple verbs with the same object, then the different verbs can be used with the same object, and the same object used with different verbs (e.g., bounce a wheel, roll a wheel), thus further moving in the direction of establishing stimulus and response classes. All of these various procedures described above make use of fill-in-the-blank type verbal stimulus, but eventually these verbal stimuli should be changed to a WH format, or complete sentence question. However, answering these types of questions is often difficult for many children with autism for the reasons described below, but the suggestion here is that fill-in procedures can be used a bridge to WH and complete sentence verbal stimuli and correct intraverbal responding.

Answering WH and complete-sentence questions

Often the target of early intraverbal training (although typically not identified as such) is to teach a child to answer WH questions such as What is your phone number? Where do you live? or, What did you do today? Children with autism often have difficulty answering these kinds of questions for at least four reasons. Commonly asked WH questions are often hard to answer because the content of the questions are often beyond the child’s existing intraverbal repertoire. That is, the child may be unable to emit even simple intraverbal behavior such as song fill-ins, animal sounds, in-context fill-ins, or out-of-context fill-ins. Yet, it is not uncommon to find IEP goals for answering WH questions for a child with very little other intraverbal behavior, and often an extensive amount of teaching time is spent on these types of questions and the result is a rote response, such as always saying I played today, when asked What did you do today?

Verbal questions may also be hard because they often have several parts with one word modifying another (e.g., Who did you see today? vs. What did you do today?) and without the appropriate verbal history words like see vs do do not differentially control verbal responses, nor do they correctly alter the evocative effect of the following words (the correct types of verbal conditional discriminations are not established). WH questions are also difficult to answer because they often sound similar by starting with the same sound (i.e., What, Where, When, Which, Why), and ending with the same word, as in the example above where both questions start with WH and end with today. Finally, since verbal stimuli are typically auditory and transitory (they start and stop quickly) a child must learn to carefully attend to them. A typical sentence may have 6 or 7 words and be emitted in 2-3 seconds. This type of attending behavior is different from that established with nonverbal stimuli and tacting. Many nonverbal stimuli are static and attending to them is relatively easier. Visual prompts to attend to them are also possible (pointing, moving them, eye contact, etc.). Such prompting is impossible with verbal stimuli, in fact, prompts are usually in the form of more verbal stimuli (e.g., listen carefully). For this reason, children with autism are often identified as “visual learners,” but verbal stimuli are typically more complicated and for this reason we are all better at visual learning. Most of the common forms of verbal stimulus control (e.g., WH questions, multiple component sentences) are simply harder to establish for all learners than the common forms of nonverbal stimulus control (naming nouns, verb, and adjectives). Typically developing children are not able to answer complex WH questions until often 2 to 3 years of age. These same children, by that time have an extensive tact repertoire containing nouns, verbs, adjectives, prepositions, and adverbs, yet they are often unable to answer even simple WH questions (e.g., What did you do at daycare today?).

Teaching verbal responses controlled by WH questions

There are several components to the suggested solution to teaching responding to WH questions and establishing verbal stimulus control. The first involves a behavioral analysis of the complexity of the presented verbal stimulus and the targeted verbal response. If a child can successfully emit intraverbal responses under the control of verbal stimuli involving fill-ins then training on answering WH questions may be appropriate. Specific fill-in-the-blank verbal stimuli can be uses as a prompt to evoke correct responses then faded out, while transferring stimulus control to the new verbal stimulus. The basic procedure is similar to the transfer of stimulus control procedures described previously.

Step 1: Conduct an intraverbal probe on the target relations

As with the RFFC to IV fill-in steps described above, carefully select the first target intraverbal relations based on the child’s success with the related verbal components of the intraverbal relation. Specifically, the probability of successful intraverbal training will be higher if the child can emit the relevant tacts, RD, RFFC, and IV fill-ins prior to WH intraverbal training. For example, if the child can successful tact and RD shoes and feet, as well as the related RFFC and fill-in relations described above, then training on WH questions may be successful. Select at least two new WH intraverbal targets and begin the session with an intraverbal first trial probe. Reinforce correct responses and follow incorrect responses with the correction procedure described below. Following the acquisition of one of the intraverbal relations add new targets one or two at a time.

Table 8-6

First-trial intraverbal probe.

________________________________________________________________________

Antecedent Behavior Consequence

Verbal stimulus (What do you wear on your feet?) Shoes Praise

Step 2: Transfer of stimulus control from Fill-ins to WH verbal stimuli

Select the target verbal relations (e.g., What do you wear on your feet? and What do you eat?), and begin with a fill-in trial (Table 8-7). Following a correct response, praise the response and after a few seconds, present the verbal stimulus in a WH format (e.g., You eat.... Right. What do you eat?). Reinforce a correct response with the opportunity to obtain a highly preferred item (e.g., a mand trial), and follow an incorrect response with a correction procedure consisting of returning to the fill-in verbal stimulus. Many children will easily emit these slightly new intraverbal relations, however, if a child continues to emit incorrect responses, it may be too soon to attempt this type of transfer. For the child who is correct, begin to add distracter trials (tacts, RDs, RFFCs), and add new WH intraverbal relations.

Table 8-7

RFFC to IV transfer trial.

________________________________________________________________________

Antecedent Behavior Consequence

Verbal stimulus (What do you wear on your feet)? Shoes Praise

Verbal stimulus (On your feet you wear...)

________________________________________________________________________

Step 5: Generalization, multiple exemplars, and reverse fill-ins

A primary goal of early intraverbal training is to avoid the establishment of rote responding. There are several procedures that can help to offset rote responding and move toward the establishment of an intraverbal repertoire that is more similar to that of a typically developing child. The concept of generalization has been presented earlier in the establishment of the other verbal repertoires and it is certainly a key element of intraverbal training. The two types of generalization, stimulus generalization and response generalization can also be applied to verbal stimuli and to intraverbal responses. Table 8-5 presents the concept of stimulus classes and response classes as they relate to the intraverbal relation. A verbal stimulus class as presented in the RFFC chapter involves teaching a child to respond to the same item with a variety of different verbal stimuli. For example, the child learns to touch a shoe under the control of the different verbal stimuli feet, sock, Nike, etc. These stimuli all form a class of stimuli that evoke the same behavior. Verbal response classes consist of relations where a variety of different responses are controlled by one verbal stimulus. For example, the single word Shoe can evoke the response sock, foot, or Nike. The focus on classes of stimuli and responses helps to prevent any single stimulus and response relation from becoming too strong, and possibly rote.

To be continued...........

1 STIMULI CATEGORIES

1. PARTS OF JACK-O-LANTERN-eyes, nose, mouth, stem, candle

2. VEGETABLES-broccoli, peppers, carrots, celery

3. THINGS THAT WRITE-pencil, pen, marker, crayon, chalk

4. HOT THINGS-stove, sun, grill, iron, fire

5. PLANTS-grass, flowers, trees, bushes

6. APPLIANCES-fridge, stove, microwave, washing machine, dryer

7. THINGS YOU WEAR ON HEAD-glasses, helmet, hat, mask

8. THINGS WITH WHEELS-car, van, motorcycle, Ferris wheel, trike

9. DISHES/THINGS YOU USE WHEN EATING-fork, spoon, knife, cup, plate, bowl,

napkin

10. ROUND THINGS-sun, plate, wheel, ball, cookie

11. THINGS THAT CLEAN-soap, shampoo, vacuum, washcloth

12. FOODS YOU PUT KETCHUP ON-FF, hamburger, tater tots, hot dog

13. THINGS THAT GO IN YOUR BACKPACK-books, lunch, clothes toys

14. THINGS THAT FLY-bird, airplane, bugs, helicopters

15. THINGS THAT KEEP YOU WARM-blanket, jacket, heater, sun, sweatshirt,

sweatpants, gloves/mittens

16. STICKY THINGS-glue, tape, candy

17. THINGS WITH BRISTLES-toothbrush, hairbrush, broom

18. FOODS-hotdog, popcorn, apple, broccoli, cake, etc.,

19. COLORS-red, green, orange, blue, purple

20. DRINKS-coke, juice, water, milk, tea

21. THINGS IN SKY-clouds, sun, moon, birds, lightning, rainbows

22. SHAPES-circle, square, triangle, diamond, oval, rectangle

23. TOYS-puzzle, blocks, doll, legos

24. TOOLS-hammer, shovel, saw, screwdriver

25. VEHICLES-car, truck, van, bus, train, airplane

26. CLOTHES-shirt, shoes, underwear, pants, socks

27. PEOPLE

28. NUMBERS

29. LETTERS

30. SNACKS-cookies, chips, pretzels, crackers

31. THINGS AT SCHOOL-desks, chairs, books, blocks

32. FRUITS-apple, banana, peach, grape, watermelon

33. GAMES-Mr. Mouth, Hungry Hungry Hippos, Perfection, Connect 4

34. DESERTS-cake, ice cream, pie, cookies

35. THINGS IN KITCHEN-fridge, stove, trashcan, microwave

36. THINGS IN BATHROOM-toilet, bathtub, sink, toothbrush, towels

37. THINGS IN BEDROOM-bed, dresser, closet, nightstand, alarm clock

38. THINGS AT PARK-swings, slide, sandbox, teeter totter, monkey bars

39. THINGS AT BIRTHDAY PARTY-cake, ice cream, presents, games

40. FURNITURE-desk, chair, table, bed, dresser

41. MOVIES-Thomas the Train, Pokemon, Barney, Spot

42. RESTAURANTS-McD, Burger King, Cici's, Wendy's, Luby's

43. COMMUNITY HELPERS (needs a better name)-police man, nurse, doctor,

veterinarian, bus driver, garbage man, mail man

44. THINGS IN BACKYARD-swing, slide, trampoline, pool, dog, trees, grass

45. GIRLS-Kelly, Misty, Steph, etc.,

46. BOYS-John, Aaron, Christian, etc.

2 CRITICAL STIMULI

1. FRIENDS AT SCHOOL.

2. SCHOOL CLOTHES-green shirt, shorts, pants, tennis shoes

3. GIRLS' CLOTHES-dress, skirt, panties (not sure if we should go there!)

4. TEACHERS AT SCHOOL-

5. CLOTHES FOR HOT WEATHER-T-shirt, shorts, sandals, bathing suit

6. CLOTHES FOR COLD WEATHER-jacket, sweatshirt, sweatpants, gloves/mittens

7. CLOTHES FOR RAIN-raincoat, umbrella, rain boots

8. TOYS IN THE BATHTUB

9. BABY TOYS-rattle, baby swing, pacifier, mobile

10. ANIMALS W/ 4 LEGS-cat, dog, horse, pig, monkey

11. ANIMALS WITH 2 LEGS-penguin, kangaroo,

12. ANIMALS W/ TAILS-cat, dog, horse, pig

13. YOUNG PEOPLE-

14. OLD PEOPLE-grandma, papa, mommy (just kidding :)

15. BROWN DRINKS-coke, hot chocolate, tea, coffee, chocolate milk

16. WHITE FOODS-popcorn, cheese, marshmallows

17. SWEET FOODS-Popsicle, candy, cake, fruit snacks

18. ANIMALS WITH LONG NECKS-giraffe, goose,

19. SNACK FOODS-pretzels, chips, crackers, grapes, fruit snacks

20. FRIENDS THAT ARE BOYS

21. FRIENDS THAT ARE GIRLS

22. FOODS AT MCDONALDS-hamburgers, FF, chicken nuggets

23. FOODS AT TACO BELL-chips, tacos, burrito

24. FOODS YOU BUY AT KROGER

25. RESTAURANTS W/ HAMBURGERS- MCD, Burger king, Whataburger, Wendy's

26. RESTAURANTS W/ PIZZA-Cici's, pizza hut, chuck e cheese, Fuzzy's

27. COMPUTER GAMES

28. BOARD GAMES-Pokemon monopoly, don't wake daddy, Chutes and Ladders

29. GREEN VEGETABLES-lettuce, broccoli, zucchini, green beans, peas, celery

30. RED FRUITS-apple, tomato, grapes?, strawberry

31. POOL TOYS-raft, floaties, rings, noodle

32. BEACH TOYS-raft, bucket, shovel,

33. ANIMALS WITH FUR-dog, cat, bear, skunk

34. ANIMALS WITH FEATHERS-bird, penguin, emu :)

35. FOODS YOU COOK-chicken, pasta,

36. SWEET DRINKS-coke, juice, milkshake

37. SALTY FOODS-chips, pretzels, crackers, popcorn

38. ANIMALS WITH STRIPES-zebra, tiger,

39. HOT FOODS-chicken, pizza, spaghetti-Os,

40. COLD FOODS-ice cream, Popsicle, watermelon

41. BIG ANIMALS-elephant, giraffe, bear, hippo, rhino

42. LITTLE ANIMALS-mouse, bird, cat,

43. COLD DRINKS-coke, milk, milkshake, water

44. HOT DRINKS-coffee, tea, hot chocolate,

45. ZOO ANIMALS-zebra, lion, tiger, elephant

46. WATER ANIMALS-fish, whale, dolphin, shark, starfish

47. FARM ANIMALS-cow, goat, sheep, horse, pig

48. FOODS YOU EAT FOR BREAKFAST-cereal, oatmeal, waffles

49. FOODS YOU EAT FOR LUNCH-chips, sandwich, crackers, apple

50. FOODS YOU EAT FOR DINNER-pizza, spaghetti,

51. RIDES AT FAIR-Ferris wheel, tea cups, merry go round

Procedure:

1. Ask fill-in question (example: “oink says a ------”).

2. If student responds correctly, reinforce appropriately.

3. If incorrect, prompt student with correct response and

have student repeat word after you.

4. Ask original question again.

5. If correct, with an independent response, reinforce. If incorrect, repeat above procedure.)

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download