Delayed identity matching to complex samples: Teaching students with mental retardation spelling and...

Research in Developmental Disabilities. Vol. 14. PP. 19-38. 1993 0891-4222193 $6.00 + .OO Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. Copyright 8 1993 Pergamon Press Ltd.

Delayed Identity Matching to Complex Samples: Teaching Students With Mental Retardation Spelling and the Prerequisites

for Equivalence Classes

Robert Stromer

Eunice Kennedy Shriver Center

Harry A. Mackay

Northeastern University

Students with mental retardation learned delayed matching to sample in which some of the trials involved complex sample stimuli, each consisting of a picture and a printed word A touch to the sample complex removed it from the computer display and produced either picture comparisons or a choice pool of letters. If the comparisons were pictures, selecting the picture identical to the preceding sample was reinforced. If the letters appeared, letter-by-letter construction of the preceding printed word sample was reinforced. The procedure engendered new constructed-response spelling performances to pictures and dictated words as samples. The emergence of relations among diflerent sets of printed words (paired with the same pictures) suggested the formation of equivalence classes. One subject’s dota suggest that written spelling, oral spelling, and naming also may emerge as byproducts of the intervention

Studies that apply stimulus equivalence methods and concepts in language arts instruction suggest that teaching spelling directly may also establish

This research was supported by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (Grants HDO4147 and HD25995) and the Massachusetts Department of Mental Retardation (Contract No. 3404-8403-306). The authors thank Fay Gilbert, Steve McDonald, Deana Antonacci, Kathy Clark, and Tom Callahan for data collection and analysis. They also thank Larry Stoddard for his suggestions on the research and Bill McIlvane for his comments on a draft of the paper.

Requests for reprints should be sent to Robert Stromer, Behavioral Sciences Division, Eunice Kennedy Shriver Center, 200 Trapelo Road, Waltham, MA 02254.

19

20 R. Stromer and H. A. Mackay

several related performances without further teaching (Mackay, 1991; Stromer, 1991; Stromer, Mackay, & Stoddard, 1992). For example, students with mental retardation came into Mackay’s experiment (1985; see also Mackay & Sidman, 1984) able to match colored patches to their dictated names and could name the color of the patches aloud. They could not: (a) match printed words to the same dictated words, (b) match the printed words and the colored patches to one another, or (d) name the printed words. These performances emerged, however, after the students learned a constructed-response spelling performance. For example, given a patch of yellow, the subjects learned to rearrange the individual letter tiles 1, w, y, 1, e, and o to “spell” the word yellow.

In Mackay’s study, the emergence of matching the printed words to their dictated names qualifies as a rudimentary form of auditory receptive reading. Matching printed words to colored patches, and vice versa, qualifies as reading comprehension; naming the printed words qualifies as oral reading. The emergent matching-to-sample performances also suggest the formation of stimulus-equivalence classes, each class consisting of a dictated word, a printed word, and a colored patch (for detailed discussions of stimulus equivalence procedures and concepts, see Sidman, 1986, 1990; Sidman & Tailby, 1982).

Dube, McDonald, McIlvane, and Mackay, (1991) recently described a prompt-fading procedure to establish computer-based constructed-response spelling. Stromer and Mackay (in press) extended Dube et al. by demon- strating (a) an alternative way to establish constructed-response spelling and (b) the formation of classes of equivalent stimuli among pictures and printed words. The critical trials involved either delayed identity matching of the pictures or delayed construction of the words to complex sample stimuli composed of both a picture and a printed word. During an initial baseline, for example, the sample complex involved a picture of a dog and the printed word dog. A touch to the sample removed the sample complex from the computer display and immediately produced the comparison stimuli. On some trials the comparison stimuli were pictures, and selection of the picture of the dog was reinforced. On other trials a pool of letters appeared, and selection of the letters d, o, and g, in that order, was reinforced.

After the foregoing baseline was established, different printed words were paired with the same pictures in separate stages of training. For example, one complex sample involved the picture of the dog and the printed word canine. On some training trials selection of the identical picture was reinforced as before; but on other trials, selection of the letters c, a, n, i, n, and e was reinforced. This procedure produced several new performances without further teaching: (a) constructmg the word canine to the picture of the dog, (b) matching the word canine and the picture of the dog to one

Delayed Matching to Sample 21

another, and (c) matching the words dog and canine to one another. The emergence of relations among the different sets of printed words suggested the formation of stimulus equivalence classes.

The Stromer and Mackay (in press) findings replicated prior studies of equivalences between picture and printed-word stimuli (Sidman, 1971; Sidman & Cresson, 1973) and the analysis of spelling performances (Mackay; 1985; Mackay & Sidman, 1984; Stromer, 1991). They also fur- thered studies with college students in which the elements of complex sample stimuli became related to one another and served as the basis for equivalence classes (Stromer & Stromer, 1990a, 1990b). The delayed-matching approach is unique, however, because class formation is based on a procedure that requires only identity matching (cf. Stromer & Mackay, 1990).

The present study extended the subject and procedural generality of Stromer and Mackay (in press). We assessed whether identity matching to complex samples engendered constructed-response spelling and equivalence classes in students with moderate mental retardation. Students in OUT prior study functioned at considerably higher levels. We also expanded the testing protocol by assessing constructed-response spelling and matching to dictated words, performances only posttested previously. With one student, we also tested written spelling, oral spelling, and the naming of pictures and printed words.

The analysis will contribute to the development of computer-assisted instructional procedures for establishing integrated networks of rudimentary language arts performances. Such work is important considering the paucity of research on teaching reading and spelling to individuals with moderate retardation (Singh & Singh, 1986). Furthermore, the equivalence-based approach we used may be especially suited for this population. Singh and Singh validated this view when they stated that equivalence- based procedures are “ . ..exemplary in terms of methodological sophistica- tion and provide the best evidence that basic reading skills can be taught to this population...” (p. 190).

GENERAL METHOD

Subjects and Setting

Two students with mental retardation participated. TR, a 14-year-old female, had a mental age of 5 years 11 months on the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT). Her full scale IQ was 47 on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (revised). Estimates of her grade equiva- lents on the Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT) were beginning third in reading, ending third in spelling, and ending fourth in arithmetic. KB, a 20-year-old male, had a PPVT mental age of 4 years 1 month. An attempt


to administer a Wechsler test of intelligence was curtailed because of KB’s unintelligible speech. His performances on the WRAT were all below the third grade. Both students participated in a prior study in which they learned constructed-response identity matching (Stromer & Mackay, 1992); neither student had prior experience with the present complex-sample procedure. Sessions occurred three times per week in a quiet area at school. A trainer, seated behind and to the subject’s right, monitored all sessions.

Apparatus

A Macintosh computer with a touch-sensitive screen presented stimuli and recorded data. Visual sample stimuli (pictures and printed words) appeared at top-center in the computer display (Fig. 1); auditory samples (spoken words) were presented by a speaker attached to the computer. The sample area also was used to display the words constructed during spelling trials. Comparison stimuli were presented in the lower portion of the display and were either trios of pictures or printed words, or displays of 10 letters. The locations where visual samples and comparisons appeared functioned as response “keys.”

General Procedure

Overview. The training procedures were designed to establish new constructed-response performances and to provide the prerequisites for three seven-member stimulus classes. The “dog class” consisted of a picture of a dog, the dictated names “DOG, ” “CANINE,” and “PISCES,” and the printed words dog, canine, and Pisces. The “cat class” involved a picture of a cat, the dictated names “CAT,” “FELINE,” and “VIRGO,” and the words cat, feline, and Virgo. The “owl class” involved a picture of an owl, the dictated names “OWL, ” “AVIAN,” and “TAURUS,” and the words owl, avian, and taurus. The dictated and printed words were arranged into three sets of training stimuli: “DOG,” “CAT,” “OWL,” dog, cat, and owl (Set l), “CANINE, ” “FELINE,” “AVIAN,” canine, feline, and avian (Set 2), and “PISCES,” “VIRGO,” “ TAURUS,” Pisces, Virgo, and taut-us (Set 3). The reason for studying relations with Set-3 stimuli, which of course have no “real world” basis, was to minimize the influence of extraexperimental variables. Initially, relations involving Set-l stimuli were trained.

Baseline trials with Set-l stimuli. At the top of Figure I are four examples of trials used to establish an initial baseline among pictures, printed words, and dictated words. The top left panel shows a trial where selection of a


(Set 1) a picture is reinforced task is Pic/PWl to these sample/comparison other tasks expressed similarly). three other at the of Figure are: matching to Set-l words (PWUPic), ing pictures Set-l dictated (“Wrdl”/Pic), and Set-l printed to dictated (“Wrd”/PWl).

WrdlVCAl

FIGURE 1. Panels depict computer displays of six trial types used during initial baseline. Top four panels illustrate matching Set-l printed-word comparisons to picture samples (PkIPWl), matching pictures to Set-l printed words (PWl/Pic), matching pictures to Set-1 dictated words (“Wrdl’lPic), and matching Set-l printed words to Set-l dictated words (“Wrdl’VPWl). Panels l-4 show constructing Set-l words to pictures (PiiCRl); bottom panel shows constructing Set-l words to Set-l dictated words.

24 R. and H. A. Mackay

Panels l-4 in Figure 1 depict a constructed-response (CR) trial in which the sample stimulus is a picture (PicKRl). The subject’s task was to touch letters from the choice pool that spelled the word corresponding to the picture sample. For example, with the picture of a dog as the sample, a touch to the letter d moved it from the choice pool to the construction area; sub- sequent touches to letters o and g moved the letters to the construction area and completed the trial. The bottom panel shows a similar task with spoken-word samples (“Wrdl”/CRl).

The topleft of Figure 2 shows a task that involved matching pictures to sample stimuli that combined pictures and printed words (Pic+PWl/Pic); the top-right panel shows a task that involved constructed-response matching to the same complex samples (Pic+PWl/CRl). These tasks, and all others, were presented first as simultaneous matching trials. Under simultaneous matching, a visual sample remained visible until a comparison was selected; auditory samples repeated every 2 s until a comparison was selected. All tasks were then presented as delayed matching trials in which a touch to the sample stimulus removed it from the display. The bottom panels in Figure 2 illustrate the delayed matching arrangement with the complex-sample trials. After the sample stimulus was removed from the display, the comparisons were either three pictures or the choice pool of letters. The use of delayed matching ensured discrimination of both picture and printed-word elements of the sample and appropriate stimulus control of constructed-response performances.

All trials began with a sample stimulus, and touching it produced the comparison stimuli. When the sample was a spoken word, touching a black (blank) sample area produced the comparisons and turned the sample area white. The immediate consequences for touching a correct comparison, or constructing the correct word (performances consistent with English-speak- ing conventions), were a melodic tune, a flashing computer display, and a 3-s intertrial interval. Touching an incorrect comparison, or an incorrect word construction, began the intertrial interval. The particular sample stimulus and the positions of comparison stimuli or letters in the choice pool varied unsystematically from trial to trial. Ten letters appeared in the choice pool on all constructed-response trials. The 10 letters in the choice pool always included the 8 needed to spell Set-l words (Fig. 1). (On other constructed-response trials the letters in the choice pool were those that made up the particular word appearing in the sample and selected letters from-the other two words in the set.) Students were paid one penny for each correct trial at the end of each session.

Testing. To verify new constructed-response performances and equivalence classes, relations involving stimulus Sets 2 and 3 were tested before and after adding new baseline trials. Selections during test trials produced only

Delayed Matching to Sample 2s

TukPbtPWl/Pk Task PbtPWVCR

Delayed Matching Task Plc+PWllPle Task PkwPVVllCR

ML!!! b &

FIGURE 2. Examples of complex-sample trials used in initial baseline.

the intertrial interval and none of the immediate consequences described previously. However, one penny was given at the end of each session for all correct baseline trials and all test trials regardless of performance. A constructed-response trial ended when the number of letters selected from the choice pool matched the number in the sample word, whether the selections of letters were correct or not. Details of further training and testing are described below.

METHOD AND RESULTS (SUBJECT TR)

Table 1 outlines the order of conditions given to TR and the trial types in each. An initial baseline with the pictures and Set-l dictated and printed words was established to give TR a relevant history with the various trial types. Tests l-5 followed and assessed any preexisting relations among the pictures and the dictated and printed words from Sets 1 and 2. The basis for these relations was then provided by training with Set 2; this included complex sample trials and trials involving matching printed words to dictated words. Tests l-5 were repeated to verify the new, emergent performances. Next, Tests 6-12 were given to assess preexisting relations involving the dictated and printed words in Set 3. The baseline with Set 3


included complex sample trials and trials involving matching printed words to dictated words; Tests 6-12 were repeated to verify the emergence of these performances. Finally, after establishing appropriate baselines with Set 1. written and oral spelling and naming were assessed with Sets 2 and 3 (Tests 13-16).

Specific Conditions and Results

Teach Set-l baseline; administer Tests l-5. The eight trial types (Table 1, #l) described previously were presented unsystematically in a baseline session. Each trial occurred three times, except for nine trials of each complex-sample trial. The immediate consequences occurred on only 12 of the 36 trials, and training continued until accuracy was at least 94% in two consecutive sessions. TR met this criterion in two sessions. During testing test trials were interspersed among the 36 baseline trials. (Throughout testing, TR’s baseline accuracy in this condition, and all others, was always 96% or better.)

Table 1 (#2) outlines the 10 trial types presented in Tests l-5; Figure 3 illustrates some of them. Each of five consecutive test sessions involved 18 test trials, 9 of each of 2 trial types. The tests focused on assessing relations among the pictures and the dictated and printed words from Sets 1 and 2. Tests 1 and 2 assessed matching printed words or pictures to dictated words. Test 3 asked if the printed words were related to one another, and Test 4 assessed relations among the pictures and Set-2 printed words. Test 5 assessed constructing Set-2 words to pictures and Set-2 dictated words.

The top panel in Figure 4 shows TR’s initial test results. Each bar rep- resents the number of correct test trials out of nine. Except for the perfect performance matching Set-2 printed words to their dictated words (“Wrd2”/PW2), performances ranged from l/9 to 6/9 correct on the other tests.

Teach Set-2 baseline; repeat Tests 1-5. Table 1 (#3) shows that baseline here involved three new trial types. The 42-trial baseline involved nine trials of matching Set-2 printed words to Set-2 dictated words (“Wrd2”/PW2); these trials were substituted for the three trials of matching Set-l printed words to their dictated words (“Wrdl”/PWl) used previously. There were also nine trials each of matching pictures or constructing Set-2 words to new complex samples involving pictures plus Set-2 printed words (Pic+PW2/Pic and Pic+PW2/CR2); these trials were substituted for the previous complex- sample trials.

The complex-sample trials were trained first separately, then combined with the other trials in a mixed baseline. Sessions (36 trials) with the com-


TABLE 1 Outline of TR’s Procedure

1. Teach Set-l (dog, cat, owl) Baseline Pic/PWl: Matching Set-l printed words to pictures PWl/Pic: Matching pictures to Set-l printed words ‘Wrdl’lpic: Matching pictures to Set-l dictated words ‘Wrdl’lpwl: Matching Set-l printed words to Set-l dictated words PicKRl: Constructing Set-l words to pictures “Wrdl”/CRl: Constructing Set-l words to Set-l dictated words Pic+PWl/pic: Matching pictures to complex samples (pit + Set-l words) Pic+PWl/CRl: Constructing Set-l words to complex samples (pit + Set-l words)

2. Test 1: “Wrdl”lpW2: Matching Set-2 printed words to Set-l dictated words “Wrd2”/PW2: Matching Set-2 printed words to Set-2 dictated words

Test 2: ‘WrdT’lPic: Matching pictures to Set-2 dictated words “WrdVPWl: Matching Set-l printed words to Set-2 dictated words

Test 3: PWl/PW2: Matching Set-2 printed words to Set-l primed words PWuPWl: Matching Set-l printed words to Set-2 printed words

Test 4: Pic/PW2: Matching Set-2 p&ted words to pictures PW2Ak: Matching pictures to Set-2 printed words

Test 5: “Wrd2”/CR2: Co%ucting Set-2 wo& to Set-2 dictated words Pic/CR2: Constructing Set-2 words to pictures

3. Teach Set-2 (canine, feline, avian) Baseline Pic/PWl: Matching Set-l printed words to pictures PWl/Pic: Matching pictures to Set-l printed words “Wrdl’YPic: Matching pictures to Set-l dictated words “Wrdz’/PW2: Matching Set-2 printed words to Set-2 dictated words PicKRl: Constructing Set-1 wbrds to pictures “Wrdl”/CRl: Constructinn Set-l words to Set-l dictated words Pic+PWupic: Matching phres to complex samples (pit + Set-2 words) Pic+PWUCR2: Constructing Set-2 words to complex samples (pit + Set-2 words)

4. Tests 1-5 (as above, #2)

5. Test 6:

Test 7:

Test 8:

Test 9:

Test 10:

Test 11:

Test 12:

“Wrdl’VPW3: Matching Set-3 printed words to Set-l dictated words “Wrd3”/PW3: Matching Set-3 printed words to Set-3 dictated words “WrdT/Pic: Matching pictures to Set-3 dictated words “Wrd3/PWl: Matching Set-l printed words to Set-3 dictated words PWliPW3: Matching Set-3 p&ted words to Set-l printed words PW3/PWl: Matching Set-l minted words to Set-3 printed words PiclpW3: Matching iet-3 p&ted words to pictuk PW3/Pic: Matching pictures to Set-3 printed words “Wrd3YCR3: Constructing Set-3 words to Set-3 dictated words PicKR3: Constructing Set-3 words to pictures PWuPW3: Matching Set-3 printed words to Set-2 printed words PW3/PW2: Matching Set-2 printed words to Set-3 printed words “Wrd2”/PW3: Matching Set-3 printed words to Set-2 dictated words “Wrd3”/PW2: Matching Set-2 printed words to Set-3 dictated words

6. Teach Set-3 (pisces, Virgo, taurus) Baseline “WrdlVWl: Matching Set-l words to Set-l dictated words “Wrd2VW2: Matching Set-2 words to Set-2 dictated words “Wrd3”/PW3: Matching Set-3 words to Set-3 dictated words

(Table continued on next page)


TABLE 1. Continued

Pic+PWl/Pic: Matching pictures to complex samples (pit + Set-l words) Pic+PWl/CRl: Constructing Set-l words to complex samples (pit + Set-l words) Pic+PW2/Pic: Matching pictures to complex samples (pit + Set-2 words) Pic+PW2/CR2: Constructing Set-2 words to complex samples (pit + Set-2 words) Pic+PW3/Pic: Matching pictures to complex samples (pit + Set-3 words) Pic+PW3/CR3: Constructing Set-3 words to complex samples (pit + Set-3 words)

7. Tests 6-12 (as above, #5)

8. Test 13:

Test 14:

Test 15:

Test 16:

“Wrd2”iWRT: Writing Set-2 words to Set-2 dictated words “‘Wrd3”AVRT: Writing Set-3 words to Set-3 dictated words “Wrd2VSPL: Spelling orally Set-2 words to Set-2 dictated words “Wrd3’XPL: Spelling orally Set-3 words to Set-3 dictated words PWZDJAM: Naming Set-2 printed words PW3/NAM: Naming Set-3 printed words Pic/NAM2: Naming pictures with Set-2 words Pic/NAM3: Naming pictures with Set-3 words

plex samples involved the programmed consequences after every trial and continued until accuracy in two consecutive sessions was 92% or better. The 42-trial mixed baseline (responses on a third of the trials reinforced)

Toat 6: PbCFl2

FIGURE 3. Examples of test trials (delay periods are not illustrated to save space).


TEST CONDITIONS

FIGURE 4. Test data for TR. Bars represent number of correct trials out of nine for a given triil type tested. ‘hial types used in each test are listed along abscissa. The trial type denoted by the asterisk was included in the baseline.

was then presented until accuracy was at least 93% for two sessions. Tests l-5 were repeated in the context of this new baseline (60 trials total).

TR met the initial training criterion in three sessions and that for the mixed baseline in two sessions. Figure 4 shows that TR’s performance was perfect or nearly so on Tests l-5 after Set-2 trials were added to the baseline.

Administer Tests 6-12. Tests 6-12 (Table 1, #5) were given first in the context of preceding baseline using the same testing procedures. Tests 6-10 were as the previous ones except Set-3 printed and dictated words were substituted for the Set-2 stimuli used originally. Test 11 asked whether printed words from Sets 2 and 3 were related to one another; Test 12 assessed whether Set-2 dictated words controlled selections of Set-3 printed words, and vice versa. Figure 5 (top panel) shows that accuracy on matching printed words to dictated words (“Wrd3”lPW3) was perfect. Other performances were 5/9 correct or below.


TR AfkwTeachin9sott1ad2

9

0 ra ullll,mdldl

AfterTeadtlqSd3@ireer,viqo.taurus)

TEST CONDITIONS

FIGURE 5. Additional test data for TR.

Teach Set-3 baseline; repeat Tests 6-12. The new complex-sample trials involved Set-3 printed words (Table 1, #6). These trials were trained separately as in the preceding baseline, then mixed with selected trials involving Sets 1-3. During the mixed baseline there were three trials of each type, except for nine trials of matching Set-3 printed words to their dictated words (“Wrd3”/PW3) and each of the new complex-sample trials (45 trials,


15 reinforced). After the training criteria were met, seven test sessions (45 baseline trials and 18 test trials) were conducted. TR met the initial criterion in four sessions and criterion on the mixed baseline in two sessions. Figure 5 (middle panel) shows that most test performances improved markedly; all but two were at least 819 correct.

Administer Tests 13-16. Performances on written spelling (Test 13), oral spelling (Test 14), and naming the printed words (Test 15) were assessed in the next three sessions. Each word was written on a separate piece of paper, and oral spelling and naming sessions were tape-recorded. Each session began with trials involving only Set-l stimuli until a criterion of three consecutive correct trials was met. A 36-trial test session followed and involved 18 Set-l baseline trials and 18 test trials (9 Set-2 trials, and 9 Set- 3 trials).

Finally, we assessed whether TR would use the labels corresponding to Sets 2 and 3 to name the pictures of dog, cat, and owl (Test 16). Because this test occurred some weeks after Test 15, we first verified accurate matching (92% or better in a 36-trial session) of pictures to dictated words with Sets 2 and 3. We then verified that TR could name the printed words from Sets 2 and 3 by requiring correct naming on nine consecutive trials; picture naming was then assessed. Performance on Set 2 was assessed first in a block of 18 trials, 9 baseline trials with the printed words canine, feline, and avian, and 9 test trials with the pictures of dog, cat, and owl. The same procedures were used with Set 3.

Verbal prompts were used to occasion the desired picture naming. On the first trial with the picture of an owl, TR said “Owl” rather than “Avian.” The trainer then asked if TR knew another name for the picture and TR said, “No, I don’t know.” The trainer then asked if TR could name the picture “Feline,” “Canine,” or “Avian.” The trainer said nothing for the remaining eight test trials. The same thing happened with Set 3, but TR initially called the picture of the owl “Avian.” The trainer prompted the correct Set-3 response by asking TR to use “Taurus,” “Pisces,” or “Virgo.” The remaining eight trials were unprompted.

Sample stimuli during these tests were generated by the computer. The sample was the phrase “Write (name)” for written spelling trials, “Spell (name)” for oral spelling, “Name this Word” for naming printed words, and “Name this Picture” for naming pictures. For example, the phrase “write dog” was presented at 5-s intervals. If TR’s written response was correct, the experimenter pressed “I” on the keyboard and, if incorrect, pressed key “K.” These key presses activated the consequences (described previously) scheduled for that trial. Reviews were conducted under continuous reinforcement. During tests, reinforcement was available on a third of the baseline trials but never on the test trials.


Reliability was assessed by having an independent observer score TR’s written and oral responses. The percentage of agreement was always 100%. Figure 5 (bottom panel) shows that TR was nearly perfect on these tests. As described previously, the only “errors” occurred during Test 16 on the initial trial with Sets 2 and 3. The trainer applied the verbal prompts and, TR’s naming was correct on the next eight trials.

METHOD AND RESULTS (SUBJECT KB)

Table 2 outlines KB’s procedure, which was generally the same as TR’s. However, on two occasions, only part of the baseline involving a new set of words was taught: matching the new printed words to their dictated words (e.g., “Wrd2”/PW2) and constructing words to printed words (e.g., PW2/CR2). These performances would provide the basis for only one new performance, constructing words to dictated words (e.g., “Wrd2”/CR2). All other performances should remain unchanged until training involved the complex samples. Tests 13-16 were not conducted because KB transferred from the facility where the research took place.

TABLE 2 Outline of KB’s Procedure

1. Teach Set-l (dog, cat, owl) Baseline (Same as TR, #l)

2. Tests l-5 (Same as TR, X2)

3. Teach Part of Set-2 (canine, feline, avian) Baseline Same as TR (#6) except: “Wrd2”/PW2: Matching Set-2 printed words to Set-2 dictated words PW2KR2: Constructing Set-2 words to Set-2 printed words

4. Tests l-5 (Same as TR, #2)

5. Teach Rest of Set-2 Baseline (Same as TR, #3)

6. Tests l-5 (Same as TR, X2)

7. Teach Part of Set-3 (pisces, Virgo, taurus) Baseline Same as TR (#6) except: “‘Wrd3”/PW3: Matching Set-3 printed words to Set-3 dictated words PW3KR3: Constntcting Set-3 words to Set-3 printed words

8. Tests 6-12 (Same as TR, #5)

9. Teach Rest of Set-3 Baseline (Same as TR, #6)

10. Tests 6-12 (Same as TR, #5)


TEST CONDITIONS

FIGURE 6. Test data for KB. Bars represent number of correct trials out of nine for a given trial type tested. Trial types used in each test are listed along abscissa. The trial type denoted by the asterisk was included in the baseline.

Specific Conditions and Results

Teach Set-l baseline; administer Tests I-5. KB met the initial baseline criterion in two sessions. Except for one session (86%), baseline accuracy was always 95-100% throughout all testing. Figure 6 (top panel) shows that accuracies during initial testing were relatively low.

Teach part of Set-2 baseline; repeat Tests I-5. Training began with a mix- ture of 27 trials of matching Set-2 printed words and Set-2 dictated words (“Wrd2”PW2) and 27 trials of constructing Set-2 words to Set-2 printed


words (PW2KR2); these trials were given under simultaneous matching conditions. KB was 100% correct on the constructed-response trials but only 63% correct on the dictated-word trials. The next session began with a review of constructed response; the criterion was six consecutive correct. A delayed-cue procedure was then used to teach matching to dictated words (54-trial session).

Details of the delayed-cue procedure may be found elsewhere (Dube, Iennaco, Rocco. Kledaras, & McIlvane, 1992). In general, trials began with the correct and incorrect comparison stimuli presented together, but the incorrect comparison disappeared after a brief delay. Initially, because the duration of the incorrect comparison was so brief, responses to it were not possible. The duration of the incorrect comparison then increased on the trial following a correct selection and decreased on the trial following an error. Kl3 made only one error during the delayed-cue session; the last 24 trials were correct in which both comparisons were simultaneously available.

The original 54-trial mixed session was then given twice, once under simultaneous and once under delay conditions; KB was 98% and 100% correct, respectively. Last, the 42-trial mixed baseline was the same as above, except nine trials of matching Set-2 words to their dictated words (“Wrd2”/PW2) were substituted for the three involving Set-l used previously (“Wrdl”/PWl). There also were 12 identity word-construction trials (PW2KR2) added, and the number of complex-sample trials (Pic+PWl/Pic and Pic+PWI/CRl) was decreased to three each. KB was 100% correct in two such sessions. Tests l-5 were given in the next five sessions. Figure 6 (middle panel) shows that the only performance that improved was on the Test-5 trials assessing word constructions to Set-2 dictated words (“Wrd2’KlU).

Teach all of Set-2 baseline; repeat Tests l-5. KB met the mixed baseline criterion in four sessions. Figure 6 (bottom panel) shows that test performances were at least 8/9 correct.

Teach part of Set-3 baseline; administer Tests k-12. In simultaneous matching, identity word constructions (PW3KR3) were trained fust, followed by matching Set-3 printed words to Set-3 dictated words (“Wrd3”lPW3). The two trial types were then mixed in a delayed matching session. Each session was 54 trials, and the criterion was one session of 94% or better in each type. KB met these criteria in five sessions. Finally, the 45-&l mixed baseline was like TR’s, except 18 word-construction trials with Set-3 stimuli (PW3KR3) were substituted for the complex-sample trials (Pic+PW3/Pic and Pic+PW3/CR3). Criterion here was met in five sessions. Tests 6-12 were given next. Figure 7 (top panel) shows that KB was 819 correct on the Test-10 trials assessing word constructions to Set-3 dictated words

Delayed Matching to sample 35

KB NterTeschingPutdSot3(pbca.~tawus)

Q-l

TEST CONDITIONS

FIGURE 7. Additional test data for KB.

(“Wrd3”/CR3), a performance predicted on the basis of the partial baseline training. Other test performances ranged from O/9 to 6/9 correct.

Teach all of Set-3 baseline; repeat Tests 6-12. KB met the mixed baseline criterion in five sessions. Figure 7 (bottom panel) shows that most test performances were vastly improved.

DISCUSSION

Students with mental retardation learned delayed matching baselines that used complex sample stimuli, each consisting of a picture and a printed word. The same pictures were paired with different printed words across separate stages of training. In each stage, either delayed identity matching of the pictures or delayed construction of the words was required. This history engendered new constructed-response spelling performances to either pictures or dictated words as sample stimuli. Arbitrary relations among the different sets of printed words also emerged and suggested the formation of

36 R.

classes of equivalent stimuli. Additional tests suggested that written and oral spelling, picture naming, and reading may also emerge as byproducts of the intervention.

The findings illustrate tremendous economy of teaching. For example, TR performed just one task accurately upon initial testing with the Set-2 words canine, feline, and avian. After the complex-sample training, TR was able to perform nine new tasks with these words: five matching and constructed-response tasks and four new spelling and naming tasks during final posttests. These results were replicated with the Set-3 words Pisces, Virgo and taurus. Moreover, because the pictures used during training with Sets 2 and 3 were the same ones used during the initial training with Set 1 (dog, cat, owl), all three sets of stimuli were potentially related by equivalence (Sidman, 1971; Sidman & Cresson, 1973; Sidman & Tailby, 1982). Such equivalence relations were confirmed by the emergence of 12 additional matching performances involving mixtures of dictated and printed words (e.g., matching the printed word canine to the dictated words “DOG” or “PISCES”). Thus, a relatively modest investment in teaching resulted in 30 new performances.

The results extend the subject generality of Stromer & Mackay (in press) because the present participants were functioning at much lower levels. Procedural generality was achieved in part by the inclusion of a more com- prehensive test battery, including an assessment of relations involving dictated-word samples. Overall, the findings contribute to the development of cost-effective procedures for establishing an integrated set of rudimentary language arts performances (e.g., see reviews by Mackay, 1991; Mackay & Sidman, 1984; Stromer, 1991; Stromer et al., 1992). We note, however, further research should address two procedural factors that perhaps limit the generality of our results: (a) the students’ prior training histories in Stromer and Mackay (1992) may have influenced their performance in the present study; and (b) only two students participated and each received a slightly different intervention.

Student KB’s two-part teaching procedure differed from our previous study. Only constructed-response spelling to dictated words improved after KB learned to match printed words to their dictated names and construct the words to their identical samples. Other performances improved after teaching with the complex samples. These data speak to the importance of the complex-sample trials in establishing relations among pictures and printed words. However, the positive effects of the initial teaching support a previous observation: If pictures, dictated words, and printed words are already related to one another, teaching identity constructed-response matching may enhance spelling (Stromer & Mackay, in press).

One could question the internal validity of the procedures because a pretest/posttest experimental design was used. Further analyses would be


strengthened by using a different tactic, a multiple baseline design across training phases, for example (e.g., Stromer & Mackay, in press). However, it is unlikely that extraexperimental variables could account for the critical performances trained and tested. Students were not currently engaged in any classroom activities exposing them to the words in Sets 2 and 3. The influence of extraexperimental variables was minimized further because the matching relations studied using Set-3 words had no “real world” basis but were experimentally contrived (e.g.., matching the printed words Pisces and canine to one another). An alternative to this approach, which raises concerns about external validity, would be to study classes of entirely functional stimuli (e.g., dictated and printed number names, sets of objects, and numerals).

Extraexperimental influences were not eliminated, however. For example, it was interesting that TR performed perfectly when matching printed words to dictated words (Sets 2 and 3) was assessed for the fust time. TR’s previously acquired phonics skills probably account for these findings. In contrast, performances where phonics would not be a benefit were pre- dictably low. KB showed no comparable ability to match novel printed words to dictated words, suggesting that phonics skills did not play a piv- otal role in the experimental outcomes obtained. Nonetheless, because of their importance to developing generative reading and spelling skills, the systematic study of phonics in the context of equivalence-based procedures is warranted.

The present and prior works support the use of constructed-response methods as alternatives to keyboard approaches to teaching spelling with behaviorally limited students (cf. Stevens, Blackhurst, & Slaton, 1991). The skills required to operate a computer keyboard are sufficiently complex to exclude many students from its use. In contrast, word-construction procedures require a relatively simple touch response and lend themselves to a variety of teaching options. Besides the present complex-sample procedure, other options for teaching word constructions include stimulus fading (Dube et al., 1991) and time delay (cf. Stevens et al., 1991). These latter procedures may be useful for students unable to acquire the complex baseline used in the present study. Word-construction programs can be administered “by hand,” either individually or perhaps in groups (e.g., Mackay, 1985; Stromer et al., 1992). However, the programmatic benefits of computer- based interventions justify their continued research and development.

REFERENCES

Dube, W. V., lennaco, F. M., Rocco, F. J., Kledaras, J. B., & McIlvane, W. J. (1992). Microcomputer-based programmed instruction in identity matching to sample for persons with severe disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 2.2941.


Dube, W. V., McDonald, S. J., McIlvane, W. J., & Mackay, H. A. (1991). Constructed-response matching to sample and spelling instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 305-317.

Mackay, H. A. (1985). Sthnulus equivalence in rudhnentary reading and spelling. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 5,373-387.

Mackay, H. A. (1991). Stimulus equivalence: Implications for the development of adaptive behavior. In R. Remington (Ed.), The challenge of severe mental handicap: An applied behaviour analytic approach (pp. 235-259). London: John Wiley & Sons.

Mackay, H. A., & Sidman, M. (1984). Teaching new behavior via equivalence relations. In I? H. Brooks, R. Sperber, & C. MacCauley @is.), Learning and cognition in the mentally retarded (pp. 493-513). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbanm.

Sidman, M. (1971). Reading and auditory-visual equivalences. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 14,5-13.

Sidman, M. (1986). Functional analysis of emergent verbal classes. In T. Thompson & M. D. Zeiler (Eds.). Analysis and integration of behavioral units (pp. 213-245). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Sidman. M. (1990). Equivalence relations: Where do they come from? In D. E. Blackman & H. Lejeune (Eds.), Behavior analysis in theory andpractice: Contributions and controversies (pp. 93-114). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbamn.

Sidman, M., & Cresson, O., Jr. (1973). Reading and crossmodal transfer of stimulus equivalences in severe retardation. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 77,515-523.

Sidman, M., & Tailby, W. (1982). Conditional discrimination vs. matching to sample: An expan- sion of the testing paradigm. Journal of the Experimentat Analysis of Behavior, 37.5-22.

Singh, N. N., & Singh, J. (1986). Reading acquisition and remediation in the mentally retarded. In N. R. Ellis & N. W. Bray (Eds.), Internutional review of research in mental retardorion (Vol. 14, pp. 165-199). New York: Academic Press.

Stevens, K. B., Blackhurst, A. E., & Slaton, D. B. (1991). Teaching memorized spelling with a microcomputer: Tie delay and computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24.153-160.

Stromer, R. (1991). Stimtdus equivalence: Implications for teaching. In W. Ishaq (Ed.), Human behavior in today’s world (pp. 109-122). New Yorlo Eraeger.

Stromer, R., & Mackay, H. A. (1990). Arbitrary stimulus relations and delayed identity matching to complex samples. Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin, 8,22-25.

Stromer, R., & Mackay, H. A. (1992). Delayed constructed-response identity matching improves the spelling performances of students with mental retardation. Journal of Behavioral Education, 2, 139-156.

Stromer, R., & Mackay, H. A. (in press). Spelling and emergent picture-printed word relations established with delayed identity matching to complex samples. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.

Stromer, R., Mackay, H. A., & Stoddard, L. T. (1992). Classroom applications of stimulus equivalence technology. Journal of Behavioral Education, 2.225-256.

Stromer, R., & Stromer, J. B. (199oa). The formation of arbitrary sthnulus classes in matching to complex samples. The Psychological Record, 40,51-66.

Stromer, R., & Stromer, J. B. (199Ob). Matching to complex samples: Further study of arbitrary stimulus classes. The Psychological Record, 40.505-516.

Date post:	27-Jan-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	georgebrown
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Delayed identity matching to complex samples: Teaching students with mental retardation spelling and...

Documents