Teaching children with autism using conditioned cue-value and response-marking procedures: a socially valid procedure.
Five children with autism were taught to match printed words to corresponding pictures. Participants' speed of learning was compared across three training conditions, each involving a 5-s delay of reinforcement, using a within-participants alternating treatments design. In the cue-value condition, a verbal phrase of approval (e.g., "good!") was delivered only after correct responses and again after a 5-s delay when a primary reinforcer was delivered; in the response-marking condition, an attention-eliciting verbal cue (e.g., "look!") was delivered after both correct and incorrect responses, but not prior to the primary reinforcer; in the delay only condition, there were no cues during a 5-s delay. Performance in the no-cue control was inferior to both the cue-value and response-marking conditions, but there was little difference between the latter two conditions. The implications of these results for facilitating learning in applied settings are discussed.
Grindle
Corinna F
CF
Centre for Behavioural Research, Analysis, and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, School of Psychology, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton S017 1BJ, UK.
Remington
Bob
B
D001321:Autistic Disorder / Q000534:rehabilitation*; D002648:Child; D002675:Child, Preschool; D003214:Conditioning, Classical; D006801:Humans; D007858:Learning; D008297:Male; D011932:Reading; D012055:Reinforcement Schedule; D013647:Task Performance and Analysis