Effects of multiple exemplar instruction on transformation of stimulus function across written and vocal spelling responses by students with autism.

Abstract

Introduction According to Skinner (1957), speaking and writing are different kinds of verbal operants that initially must be conditioned (p. 191). Skinner (1957) proposed that words that occur in written form are functionally independent of vocal form of word. He refers to this as same response in different media (p.191). On this topic, Skinner wrote: But speaking and writing are obviously different kinds of behavior, which utilize different parts of body in different ways. Where we could paraphrase the word used in different ways as the response in different types of operant, here we must attempt to bridge gap between spoken and written behavior either by pointing to something common to occasions upon which behaviors occur or among effects which they have upon listener and reader. But common controlling variables, action either prior to behavior in stimulation occasion or after behavior as part of event called reinforcement, will not permit us to get from one form of response to other. The two forms of behavior must be separately conditioned. (p. 191) Consistent with Skinner's theory, several types of verbal operants are initially independent including: mands and tacts (e.g., Lamarre & Holland, 1985; Hall & Sundberg, 1987; Twyman, 1996; Williams & Greer, 1993), listener and speaker (Horne & Lowe, 1996), and written and spoken (Greer, Yuan, & Gautreaux, 2005). Recent research reported effectiveness of multiple exemplar instructional methods in joining separate verbal operants to a single controlling stimulus, such as with listener and speaker (Horne & Lowe, 1996; Fiorile & Greer, 2007; Greer, Stolfi, Chavez-Brown, & Rivera-Valdez, 2005; Pistoljevic, 2008), and with written and spoken (Greer, Yuan, et al., 2005). Similarly, Nirgudkar (2005) and Nuzzolo-Gomez & Greer (2005) joined single to control of different establishing operations for mand and tact operants as a function of multiple exemplar instruction (MEI) across establishing operations. According to Greer & Ross (2008) MEI) (also known as multiple exemplar training or MET) has been described in literature in two ways. In one use of term (also called general case teaching), MEI refers to a tactic in which different examples of stimulus are presented when teaching generalization or abstraction (e.g., Hughes & Rusch, 1989; Sprague & Horner, 1984). For example, teaching textual to phonemes across multiple exemplars results in emission of accurate textual to novel words (Engelmann & Carnine, 1982). In another usage, MEI refers to a tactic used to bring independent operants (e.g., writing, spelling aloud, and textually responding) under joint stimulus control for novel stimuli by rotating different to a single stimulus in instructional sets (Greer, Yuan, et al., 2005; Fiorile & Greer, 2007; Greer, Stolfi, et al., 2005). That is, the manipulation of initially independent response topographies with stimulus may generate joint stimulus control such that a single stimulus can evoke both responses (Greer, Yuan, et al. p. 100). In study described herein, latter description of MEI applies. Greer, Yuan, et al. (2005) tested effect of MEI across written and spoken in instructional sets on acquisition of untaught spelling in vocal or written form, for four young children, using a delayed multiple probe design. After an initial test showed that participants could not spell three sets of five words, participants were taught to spell Set 1 words in one response form (either vocal or written), and after achieving mastery in taught form, probes were conducted on untaught form. …