Skinner's Analysis Research Articles

Constructs and events in verbal behavior.

Skinner's (1957) analysis of verbal behavior has been the subject of much controversy in recent years. While criticism has historically come from outside the field of behavior analysis, there are now well-articulated arguments against Skinner's analysis of verbal behavior from within the field as well. Recently, advocates of Skinner's analysis have attempted to respond to the critiques, particularly to those regarding Skinner's definition of verbal behavior articulated by proponents of relational frame theory. Specifically, it has been suggested that talk about definitions equates to making the essentialist error. This paper provides an overview of these issues in the context of understanding the role of constructs in science more generally. It will be argued that definitions are central to scientific progress, and are not only relevant to a functional analysis, but a central prerequisite to the pursuit of such an analysis.

Thirty Points About Motivation From Skinner's Book Verbal Behavior.

Skinner discussed the topic of motivation in every chapter of the book Verbal Behavior (1957), usually with his preferred terminology of "deprivation, satiation, and aversive stimulation." In the current paper, direct quotations are used to systematically take the reader through 30 separate points made by Skinner in Verbal Behavior that collectively provide a comprehensive analysis of his position regarding the role of motivation in behavior analysis. In addition, various refinements and extensions of Skinner's analysis by Jack Michael and colleagues (Laraway, Snycerski, Michael, & Poling, 2003; Michael, 1982, 1988, 1993, 2000, 2004, 2007) are incorporated, along with suggestions for research and applications for several of the points.

Editorial: Verbal Behavior and Motivating Operations

Skinner's (1957) analysis of verbal behavior is inextricably linked to a behavioral analysis of motivation. One of the most noteworthy features of the elementary verbal operants that are introduced in the first few chapters of Verbal Behavior is the distinction that is drawn between the mand and other types of verbal behavior. Each of the other elementary verbal operants is controlled by public or private discriminative stimuli that are present in the speaker's physical or social environment. To the extent that training contingencies have established tight control by these stimuli, verbal behavior in the form of tacts, intraverbals, echoics, textual behavior, and so on, should be expected to accurately mirror the stimulus conditions and events that the speaker detects through his or her senses. The mand, by contrast, is occasioned by various motivational variables that affect the speaker, summarized by Skinner (p. 36) as “relevant conditions of deprivation or aversive stimulation.” As Skinner explains in detail in chapter 9 (see also Michael, Palmer, & Sundberg, 2011), most verbal behavior is in fact under the multiple control of variables that characterize more than one verbal operant. The motivational variables that define the mand frequently enter into these multiply-controlled relations, and may serve to reduce the correspondence between what the speaker sees, hears, or feels, and what the speaker actually reports. Throughout the remainder of Verbal Behavior, Skinner makes clear that the controlling variables for the mand are ubiquitous in both simple and complex verbal behavior. In other words, the behavior of a speaker cannot be analyzed solely in terms of discriminative stimuli in the speaker's environment; it is complete only when motivational variables are also taken into account.

TRAINING PRESCHOOL CHILDREN TO USE VISUAL IMAGINING AS A PROBLEM‐SOLVING STRATEGY FOR COMPLEX CATEGORIZATION TASKS

It has been suggested that verbally sophisticated individuals engage in a series of precurrent behaviors (e.g., covert intraverbal behavior, grouping stimuli, visual imagining) to solve problems such as answering questions (Palmer, 1991; Skinner, 1953). We examined the effects of one problem solving strategy--visual imagining--on increasing responses to intraverbal categorization questions. Participants were 4 typically developing preschoolers between the ages of 4 and 5 years. Visual imagining training was insufficient to produce a substantial increase in target responses. It was not until the children were prompted to use the visual imagining strategy that a large and immediate increase in the number of target responses was observed. The number of prompts did not decrease until the children were given a rule describing the use of the visual imagining strategy. Within-session response patterns indicated that none of the children used visual imagining prior to being prompted to do so and that use of the strategy continued after introduction of the rule. These results were consistent for 3 of 4 children. Within-session response patterns suggested that the 4th child occasionally imagined when prompted to do so, but the gains were not maintained. The results are discussed in terms of Skinner's analysis of problem solving and the development of visual imagining.

Editorial: Where should we go from here?

Editorial: Where should we go from here?

The multiple control of verbal behavior.

Amid the novel terms and original analyses in Skinner's Verbal Behavior, the importance of his discussion of multiple control is easily missed, but multiple control of verbal responses is the rule rather than the exception. In this paper we summarize and illustrate Skinner's analysis of multiple control and introduce the terms convergent multiple control and divergent multiple control. We point out some implications for applied work and discuss examples of the role of multiple control in humor, poetry, problem solving, and recall. Joint control and conditional discrimination are discussed as special cases of multiple control. We suggest that multiple control is a useful analytic tool for interpreting virtually all complex behavior, and we consider the concepts of derived relations and naming as cases in point.

Applying Skinner's Analysis of Verbal Behavior to Persons With Dementia

Skinner's 1957 analysis of verbal behavior has demonstrated a fair amount of utility to teach language to children with autism and other various disorders. However, the learning of language can be forgotten, as is the case for many elderly suffering from dementia or other degenerative diseases. It appears possible that Skinner's operants may facilitate not only acquisition of language but also the ability to recall items or objects that may have appeared to be “forgotten.” The present study examined the utility of having a series of adults in long-term care emit tacts, echoics, or intraverbals upon presentation of various visual stimuli. Compared to a no-verbal response condition, it appears that the incorporation of Skinner's verbal operants can in fact improve recall for this population. Implications for the retraining of lost language are presented.

The Impact of Skinner's Verbal Behavior on Organizational Behavior Management

In the book Verbal Behavior, Skinner provided a comprehensive, behavioral account of language. While the impact of Skinner's analysis on empirical research has been examined broadly, this review of the literature focused on studies relevant to organizational behavior management (OBM). Both empirical and nonempirical journal articles in OBM were analyzed, along with several influential books in the field. The results of this review indicate that the conceptual framework provided in Verbal Behavior has had virtually no impact on empirical research in OBM and very limited impact on conceptual work. Potential reasons for this lack of influence are discussed, and further research on verbal behavior in organizations is encouraged.

Questions on verbal behavior and its application to individuals with autism: An interview with the experts.

A note about the interviews from the editors: The use of Skinner's Verbal Behavior (VB) classification system has been increasingly applied to learners with autism. We asked several of the best known behavior analysts to answer some key questions regarding this practice, the state of research regarding the advantages of this approach, and the confusion that exists regarding the application of VB to this population of learners. We structured the responses to follow each question separately, indicating the responder in each case. At the end of the interviews, you will find relevant references from each responder. We are very grateful to Dr. Mark Sundberg, Dr. Barbara Esch, Dr. John Esch, and Dr. Andrew Bondy for their thoughtful and wise replies. 1. Can you briefly explain the relevance of Skinner's analysis of verbal behavior to intervention for children with autism? Bondy Skinner's analysis provides a guide for teachers and professionals, as well as parents, to determine factors that relate to the control of language. When we teach any skill, I must know the controlling conditions currently in place- where we are now- and the controlling conditions I aim for by the end of the lesson- where we are going. Skinner reminds us to always consider the ABCs of behavior and not to become 'blinded' by the behavior in isolation. Esch and Esch First, it's important to recognize that the advantages of Skinner's analysis of verbal behavior (1957) aren't limited to just those individuals with a diagnosis of autism. The analysis is widely applicable to any language behavior, whether typical or atypical, developmentally appropriate or developmentally delayed, regardless of age, diagnosis, or etiology of condition. Skinner's analysis made it clear that language responses occur, not in isolation, but within a context of ongoing environmental events (i.e., antecedents and consequences). Responses that occur within particular contexts are said to have different functions. As Iwata and colleagues (1982/1994; also see Hanley, Iwata, & McCord, 2003; Lerman et al., 2005) and many other researchers (see Sautter & LeBlanc for a review, 2006) have shown, a functional analysis of behavior is critical to informing intervention. If responses are weak, wrong, or otherwise somehow deficient, an analysis of the contexts in which they occur can help us determine what to do. That is, we can identify the stimuli that currently evoke and maintain behavior (or those that currently fail to do so) and we can compare this information to the stimuli that should control these, or other, responses that we want to develop. Then we can use behavioral procedures (e.g., prompting, fading, differential reinforcement) to eliminate errors by establishing desired language skills (or other skills) under appropriate stimulus control. Without this analysis, we run the risk of recommending interventions that may be ineffective at best, or detrimental at worst. For children with a diagnosis of autism, Skinner's analysis also provides a wealth of why to's. Many skills that are absent or difficult to acquire for individuals with autism (e.g., echoic, self-echoic, self-editing, problem solving, autoclitics) are discussed in Verbal Behavior, yet these topics remain severely under-investigated by researchers. It would be very helpful to have more research in these areas so that clinical interventions could be developed to address these important skills. Sundberg The most important component of an intervention program for a child with autism involves the development of language and social skills (e.g., Lovaas, 1977). In the early years of autism treatment (i.e., Bijou, Baer, Wolf, Risley, Hart, Sloane, Birnbrauer, and Lovaas, at the University of Washington in the 1960s) immediate and significant gains in language and social skills were made from the systematic use of basic behavioral procedures (e. …

Use of Music in the Applied Behavior Analysis Verbal Behavior Approach for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders

The purpose of this article is to explore the use of music in treating children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) within Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) Verbal Behavior (VB) approaches and to augment the understanding of empirical mechanisms of language training techniques with music. The author describes the theoretical orientation and major principles of ABA VB approach that resulted from Skinner's analysis of verbal behavior for language training. Music's suitability for incorporation with ABA VB approach is demonstrated in terms of its functions as an automatic reinforcement. Musical stimuli as antecedent variables of verbal behaviors including motivational variables (i.e., establish operation), verbal stimuli, verbal prompts and nonverbal stimuli are presented. This article provides the theoretical and clinical implications for the use of music in ABA VB training by presenting various strategies for using music in language assessment and training. These clinical implications include an example of a music therapy language training session protocol with various interventions that can enhance verbal and nonverbal communicative behaviors in young children with ASD.

Speech and language assessment: A verbal behavior analysis.

Introduction As practitioners concerned with treating speech-language disorders, one of our primary goals is to accurately and efficiently determine which communication skills should be targeted for intervention. How do we know when something needs to be taught? What defines a skill deficit or a communication breakdown ? In everyday terms, a speech-language problem is signaled when a breakdown occurs in the interaction between a speaker and a listener. That is, we say that communication is successful when the outcome of an interaction is effective (i.e., functional), but when the interaction is weak and ineffective, we suspect a deficit in the repertoire of one of the communication partners. Thus, the critical aspect that defines communicative competence lies in the success of the dyad, a dynamic process comprised of functional units of discourse between a speaker and a listener, even when these roles are assumed within a single individual (e.g., Lodhi & Greer, 1989; Palmer, 1998; Skinner, 1957). Despite the fundamentally social nature of communication, assessment tools for speech-language deficits rarely take into account this requisite speaker-listener unit, nor is it routine to test for, describe, or analyze specific breakdowns in this unit. Most speech-language assessments in widespread today evaluate response topographies (forms of responses) alone, without regard for a functional analysis of the causal variables that lead to the specific topographic features of responses. Indeed, much assessment time and energy is expended in classifying speech-language performance, not by its role within a unit of functional communication between a speaker and a listener (i.e., cause and effect), but instead only by its arbitrarily-labeled categories describing non-function based properties such as word structure (e.g., nouns, verbs, plurals), modality (expressive, receptive), relationship (e.g., antonyms/synonyms, agreement), or other inferred characteristics (e.g., ellipsis, nomination, phonological process). This focus is illustrated by ASHA's (1993) definition of language disorder as an impairment in comprehension and/or of spoken, written, and/or other symbol systems. The disorder may involve (1) the form of language (phonology, morphology, and syntax), (2) the content of language (semantics), and/or (3) the function of language in communication (pragmatics) in any combination. Although function is an element of this definition, this usage of the term refers to a linguistic feature of language (pragmatics) in contrast to Skinner's analysis of function in which environmental variables describe (and thus, define) the contingent relation that accounts for each particular instance of an utterance (i.e., language). As such, linguistic descriptions are less adequate for applied work (i.e., treatments) than is Skinner's model, which specifies the variables that evoke and strengthen verbal behavior. To be sure, a thorough topographic description of an individual's speech-language repertoire may be a necessary component to plan an appropriate therapy program, but it is insufficient to accomplish the task because a key element of the evaluation is missing. Our job during assessment is to document not merely occurrences of wrong responses to assessment items, but also the speaker-listener environment (antecedent and consequent variables) in which the topography occurs. If a functional analysis of the speaker-listener exchange is omitted from the assessment, a critical part of language learning is at risk of being excluded from an effective intervention plan (Damico, 1993; Frost & Bondy, 2006; LaRue, Weiss, & Cable, 2008; Rowland & Schweigert, 1993; Spradlin & Siegel, 1982; Sundberg, 2008). Meaning defined by environmental context. The meaning of verbal behaviors is a function of their controlling variables (Hegde, 2008; Skinner, 1957). Speakers and listeners do not make mistakes, use the wrong word, or fail to generalize in the ordinary sense. …

Guest editors' comments.

We are pleased to offer this special issue of the Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Applied Behavior Analysis on bridging the gap between the conceptual foundations of speech and language and the treatment procedures used in speech-language pathology (SLP). Our aim in putting this special issue together was to provide the practitioner with a behavioral analytic view of speech and language that is conceptually more consistent with the behavioral treatment widely used in remediating communication disorders in children and adults. Currently, most speech-language pathologists (SLPs) who routinely use the behavioral treatment methods accept the linguistic and cognitive theories in understanding language and language development. Linguistic and cognitive theorists, being mentalistic as well as nativistic, seem unable to derive their own useful treatment procedures from their theories. Treatment of communication disorders, by nature, is experimental, and experimental approaches are based on the philosophy and methods of natural science. The behavioral view of language and language development is a natural science account, as opposed to a cognitive, mentalistic, and nativistic approach. It is precisely for this reason that the behavioral approach has generated experimentally verified treatment procedures. Therefore, adopting a natural science account of verbal behavior--a preferred substitute for language--would be more consistent with experimentally based treatment procedures. Conceptual and treatment consistency is not the only advantage of adopting the verbal behavior view of language. It helps the SLPs avoid spurious, speculative, and untestable theories of language and language acquisition. The verbal behavior view eliminates the contradiction of holding a nativistic view of language while trying to modify speech-language behaviors through environmental changes. The behavioral view will help SLPs target functional (cause-effect) language units in assessment and treatment, instead of unstable or unreliable linguistic categories that are unrelated to potential independent variables. Many other advantages are likely to follow with an approach that integrates the basic analysis of language with experimental treatment procedures. This issue consists of six papers that offer a glimpse of various aspects of Skinner's Verbal Behavior. While the first four papers offer perspectives on the behavioral analysis of language and language development, the last two illustrate the applied aspects of that analysis. Hegde's paper gives a historical background to the publication of Skinner's Verbal Behavior and the linguistic criticisms that followed. The paper then goes on to summarize the various functional units of verbal behavior, an understanding of which is essential to appreciating Skinner's analysis. Dr. Hegde points out the clinical implications of functional units as opposed to linguistic structural units for the work of SLPs. The next paper by McLaughlin offers a behavioral analysis of child language development. Dr. McLaughlin points out that the behavioral view is in fact better able to account for the documented facts of language development in children. Although there has been much research to show that verbal interactions between children and their caregivers are the basis of language learning, the distorted view that only cognitive-nativistic view of language development is valid persists in many textbooks. Dr. McLaughlin counters the generally accepted but unjustified criticism that the behavioral view cannot account for language development in children. Weitzman's paper, next in the series, addresses what linguists consider a difficult issue for behavioral analysts. …

Language and grammar: A behavioral analysis.

Introduction Speech-language pathologists' (SLPs') academic study of language is heavily influenced by linguistic and cognitive viewpoints. A majority of textbooks and writings familiar to SLPs explore in greater detail the linguistic and structural view of language and offer only a limited summary of the behavioral view whose concepts and implications are not carried throughout the text. Most SLPs are well versed in the phonologic, morphologic, syntactic, and structures of language but are not equally well versed in the functional units that are basic to Skinner's (1957) analysis. Nonetheless, SLP's treatment methods are mostly behavioral (Hegde, 1998, 2008a). Inevitably, this has led to a conceptually inconsistent model of language and treatment of language disorders. Chomsky's (1959) critical review of Skinner's (1957) book--Verbal Behavior--is better known than the book itself. Most students and clinicians seem to be unaware of the invalidity of Chomsky's criticism or the competent responses given to his negative review (e.g., Anderson, 1991; MacCorquodale, 1969, 1970; McLeish & Martin, 1975; Palmer, 2006; Richelle, 1976). Rejoinders to his review have pointed out that Chomsky poorly understood Skinner's Verbal Behavior, behavioral methodology, and behaviorism. Chomsky's misunderstanding of Skinner's book and concepts was so severe that it would prompt most examination graders to read no further (Richelle, 1976, p. 209). Chomsky frequently attributed views of other psychologists to Skinner who had unequivocally repudiated them. In a questionable case of scholarship, Chomsky repeatedly misquoted Skinner (Adelman, 2007). More than four decades after he wrote the review, Chomsky was still a critic of Skinner, and with the same distorted understanding of Skinner's work (Virues-Ortega, 2006). A commonly held assumption among most linguists, and SLPs who follow them, is that Skinner's Verbal Behavior has faded into history. The fact, however, is that research on verbal behavior and treatment of verbal behavior disorders based on Skinnerian analysis are flourishing. Among several others in the Unites States, the journals of The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, The Behavior Analyst, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, Behavior Modification, and several international journals on behavior analysis regularly publish many articles on the Skinnerian verbal behavior analysis and treatment. This journal, Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Applied Behavior Analysis is devoted to bridging the gap between the two disciplines. As Schlinger (2008a) has ably demonstrated, Skinner's Verbal Behavior is alive and well. An interesting observation Schlinger makes is that although both Verbal Behavior and Chomsky's (1957) Syntactic Structures had their 50th anniversary in 2007, Skinner's book on Amazon.com, has been selling better than Chomsky's. The verbal behavior approach to treating children with autism is now recognized internationally as the most evidence-based approach. Teaching almost all forms of communication disorders is essentially behavioral (Hegde, 1998, 2006, 2007; Hegde & Maul, 2006; Pena-Brooks & Hegde, 2007), whether some SLPs acknowledge it or not. In fact, if any tide has turned against something, it is the tide against Chomsky's generative linguistics. While Skinner's experimental and applied behavior analysis is thriving worldwide, Chomsky's generative grammar notion has disappeared from linguistics (Harris, 1993; Leigland, 2007). Chomsky's own multiple revisions and qualifications of his 1957 theory have moved away from a cognitive, generative, rule-based theory of language (Schoneberger, 2000). Within just a few years of Chomsky's Syntactic Structures was published, there was the generative semantic rebellion that denied the supremacy of grammar in language. (Linguists often describe newer approaches as revolution, war, rebellion.) Soon came the pragmatic revolution which asserted in the 1970s that language should be understood as actions performed in social contexts--mostly an arm-chair philosophical view which was still structural in its orientation. …

Using Skinner's model of verbal behavior analysis to study aggression in psychiatric hospitals.

Introduction Skinner's (1957) conceptualization of verbal behavior has its roots in a series of lectures first presented at the University of Minnesota in the late 1930s, and subsequently at Harvard University, and the University of Chicago. In these lectures Skinner proposed a new theory of verbal behavior, which differed from existing explanations of verbal behaviour that tended to account for language in terms of its underlying meaning. For Skinner, existing explanations were scientifically inadequate because they failed to identify measureable and controllable variables that were causally linked to observable behavior (Skinner, 1957). Skinner, therefore, rejected the traditional formulation of verbal behavior in favor of a new, behaviorally derived formulation. Skinner's new formulation accounted for verbal behavior in terms of operant conditioning. He suggested that verbal behavior (1957) could be understood (and therefore controlled) by gaining an appreciation of the antecedents and consequences of specific utterances, which was best done using functional analysis. So, like other operant behavior , verbal behavior (1957) was conceptualised as a function of the speaker's c urrent environment and their behavioral history. It is these factors that Skinner argued were central to the scientific investigation and understanding of verbal behavior (1957). Skinner's functional analysis identified four antecedents (stimuli) and two consequences (reinforcers) that function to control verbal behavior. The four antecedent variables were: (1) some state of deprivation or aversive stimulation, (2) some aspect of the environment, (3) other verbal behavior, and (4) one's own verbal behavior. The two consequences of verbal behavior were: (1) something related to the state of deprivation/aversive stimulation, and (2) social/educational consequences (Frost & Bondy, 2006). These six variables combine to form six basic functional (stimulus-response) relationships, which specify the antecedent conditions and subsequent consequences of verbal behavior. These six basic units or verbal operants are the building blocks of verbal behavior, and can either stand alone as simple forms of language or can combine to create more advanced forms of verbal behavior (Sundberg & Michael, 2001). The first verbal operant explained by Skinner (1957) was that of the mand. The term mand was used to refer to verbal behaviors that occur in response to a state of deprivation/aversive stimulation and which tends to produce some beneficial or desired outcome related to that state . In other words a mand is a verbal operant that specifies its reinforcer. A typical example is a request for water by one who is thirsty. Another verbal operant identified by Skinner (1957) is the tact. Tacts are verbal behavior evoked by an object/event or some property of an object/event (Skinner, 1957). That is, the presence of a given object (the stimulus) increases the probability of a given response (the tact), which in turn is generally reinforced (e.g. praise). For example, presenting a picture of a cat to a child may evoke the response cat, which is reinforced by praise from the parent. Additional verbal operants are the echoic, intraverbal, textual, and transcriptive. These are similar to tacts in that they are made as a response to some external stimulus. The difference, however, is that intraverbal, echoic, textual and transcriptive operants occur in response to a verbal discriminative stimulus ([S.sup.D]), whereas the tact is made in response to a non-verbal stimulus. Echoic verbal operants refer to verbal behaviors that are simple imitations of the verbal behavior of others. Intraverbal operants also occur in response to an [S.sup.D] but are not echoic in nature. Common examples of intraverbal behaviors are answering a question or filling in a blank, such as when a child says farm after hearing Old MacDonald had a . …

Verbal behavior by B.F. Skinner: Contributions to analyzing early language learning.

Introduction Two pieces of literature appeared quietly and without fanfare in 1957. Each book unalterably affected how we have come to view language, human behavior, and language learning. In 1957, Noam Chomsky published Syntactic Structures (1957), his germinal work that established the foundations of psycholinguistics. This work, in combination with a second publication, Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (Chomsky, 1965), broadly influenced research in linguistics and the theoretical relationships between the mind and language. Together, they represented a firm anchor point on one end-the nativistic end-of the philosophical continuum established in 1957. With regard to explaining language development, one of the more publicized features of this theory was the Language Acquisition Device, or LAD. Although there was no intention to correlate this device to any underlying neurological structure, Chomsky proposed the LAD as the presumed innate mechanism in the human brain (or mind) to explain the apparent ease and rapidity with which children acquire language. Although the concept of the LAD has been modified through the years, in the 1960s it became the widely accepted explanation for children's acquisition of language, largely removing caregivers from any active role in their children's language abilities. The opposite anchor point-the behavioral end-on this philosophical continuum was established that same year, when B.F. Skinner published Verbal Behavior (1957). (See Hegde, in this issue, for a comprehensive review of Skinner's Verbal Behavior.) In contrast to Chomsky's approach, Skinner proposed an analysis of verbal behavior based on a natural science account of behavior that had evolved since the earlier publication of his The Behavior of Organisms (1938). In Verbal Behavior, Skinner applied a functional analysis approach to analyze language behaviors in terms of their natural occurrence in response to observable environmental circumstances and the measurable effects they have on human interactions. In this view, language was characterized as the result of, as opposed to the reason for, complex human behavior. The complexities of language do not exist prior to or independent of human behavior; instead the complexities of language behavior reflect our capacity to respond verbally to the complex and subtle intricacies inherent in human experiences and interactions. In Verbal Behavior, Skinner (1957) did not emphasize explaining the nature of early language development; perhaps the explanation seemed obvious to him from the fact that he had invoked an operant model in the overall analysis. Verbal Behavior primarily focused on an explication of the causal variables for the verbal interactions of accomplished speakers and listeners whose learning histories were in place and preceded the verbal behaviors in question-in essence, adult speakers. It is perhaps unfortunate that Skinner emphasized this level of analysis-adult verbal interactions-throughout Verbal Behavior as it ostensibly posed difficulty for some who have tried to explain the development of language under his model. Chomsky critiqued Skinner's functional analysis in a book review that many found puzzling due to several lengthy criticisms put forth by Chomsky that did not relate to principles or concepts contained in Verbal Behavior. Specifically, Chomsky criticized Skinner for proposing imitation and conscientious parental tutoring as the major explanations for language development. Chomsky also took Skinner to task for his supposed reliance on memorized Markovian chains as an explanation for grammar. However, none of these elements were included in Skinner's model. Over the years, attempts to describe how Skinner's model might be applied to children's language development, including recent sources (Owens, 2005; Berko Gleason, 2005; Hulit, 2006), have continued to rely on perpetuating these misconceptions contained in Chomsky's (1959) bewildering (MacCorquodale, 1970, p. …

Editorial

Editorial

General outcome measures for verbal operants.

A general outcome measure (GOM) can be used to show progress towards a long-term goal. GOMs should sample domains of behavior across ages, be sensitive to change over time, be inexpensive and easy to use, and facilitate decision making. Skinner's (1957) analysis of verbal behavior may benefit from the development of GOM. To develop GOM, we conducted a review of the literature on mands, tacts, echoics, and intraverbals. The four areas reviewed included (a) an examination of the participant's response form (i.e., vocal or nonvocal), (b) the type of prompt used, (c) types of materials used, and (d) timing of responses or sessions. Based on the review of the literature, we developed GOM for mands and tacts. This paper attempts to bridge the concept of GOMs with Skinner's analysis of verbal behavior.

The Hefferline Notes: B. F. Skinner’s First Public Exposition of His Analysis of Verbal Behavior

B. F. Skinner's first public exposition of his analysis of verbal behavior was the Hefferline Notes (1947a), a written summary of a course Skinner taught at Columbia University during the summer of 1947 just prior to his presentation of the William James Lectures at Harvard University in the fall. The Notes are significant because they display Skinner's analysis as it made the transition from spoken to written form; moreover, they are an effective supplemental source of examples and early approximations for comprehending Skinner's functional verbal operants.

A common language: Using B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior for assessment and treatment of communication disabilities in SLP-ABA.

Introduction During the last decade there has been a growing trend for direct collaboration between the fields of speech-language pathology (SLP) and applied analysis (ABA). A common overlap between the focus of the two fields is in the area of communication assessment and intervention for the purposes of enhanced interaction skills and management of inappropriate behaviors resulting from inadequate communication skills (Koenig and Gerenser, 2006). Disagreements among professionals from both fields often can be a result of a difference in terminology. Take for example, the definition of the term A definition adopted by the American Speech-Language Hearing Association was developed by the National Joint Committee for the Communicative needs of Persons with Severe Disabilities (1991, p. 2). Any act by which one person gives to or receives from another person information about that person's needs, desires, perceptions, knowledge or affective states. Communication may be intentional or unintentional, may involve conventional or unconventional signals, may take linguistic or nonlinguistic forms, and may occur through spoken or other modes. This definition emphasizes the shared meaning established between a speaker and a listener. The Joint Committee concluded, Thus, all persons do communicate in some way. Additionally, the success of a communicative exchange could depend on the listener happening to witness the speaker's and interpreting that as communicative. The 1957 publication of B.F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior provided the field of ABA with a definition of communication. Skinner refers to behavior as reinforced through the mediation of other people (p.2) and specified that the 'listener' must be responding in ways which have been conditioned precisely in order to reinforce the of the speaker [by the verbal community] ... In other words, a speaker acts in a manner that is under the stimulus control of an audience (a listener) and the listener then provides the reinforcing consequence. It is through reinforcement of a specific verbal community (the French, the English, the Spanish) that a child learns the grammar and vocabulary of a particular community. The definitions from both fields emphasize that communication can occur in many modalities, just the spoken modality. A source of confusion in the field of SLP has been in defining the terms speech, communication, and verbal. Reports of a student including phrases such as not verbal, or non-verbal, can lead to erroneous conclusions. A speech pathologist might assume that this means that the student is yet speaking. A person using Skinner's definition would conclude that the student has no communication skills at all in any modality. The less ambiguous terminology to describe the student who is speaking would be non-speaking or non-vocal. This could mean that the student has a sophisticated language system in a non-speech modality such as pictures, sign language, or writing. Skinner's definition also helps us to identify behaviors of a student that are verbal behavior. Behaviors that lead to direct access to reinforcing consequences are communicative because access to those consequences is dependent upon another person. For example if a student goes to a table and picks up a we would say that this is communicative as the action was aimed directly at the book. On the other hand, if the student says to the teacher sitting at the table, I want that book, and the teacher hands it to the student, we would say that this is verbal behavior. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of Skinner's analysis of verbal and its application to assessment and remediation of communication deficits. A description of Skinner's primary verbal operants will be provided. …

The effects of intensive tact instruction on three verbal operants in non-instructional settings for two children with autism.

Introduction It is estimated that only one half of children with autism and related disorders will acquire any speech as a mode of communication (Lord & Paul, 1997). Thus, a frequent need among children with autism is assistance in acquiring and developing effective communication skills (Scheips, Reid, Behrmenn, & Sutton, 1998). Typically, a child with autism in the presence of a nonverbal cue will rarely emit a spontaneous initiation. The child will remain silent and speak only when verbally prompted by another person providing a question or a command (Ingenmey & Van Houten, 1991). However, much of daily communication is not verbally prompted. Thus, it is important to teach children to tact (label) objects or events under non-verbal antecedent control (Greer, & Ross, 2008; Matson, Sevin, Box, Francis, & Sevin, 1993; Williams, Carnerero, & Perez-Gonzalez, 2006) to support the emergence of unprompted speech and spontaneous initiation. Research conducted by Hart & Risley (1995) found that deficits in the development of a speaker repertoire may be the product of nature or environmental factors. Their research found that children from low socioeconomic families frequently displayed deficits in verbal repertoires on entering school. The authors noted that there were significantly fewer verbal interactions emitted among children and parents in families with low levels of socioeconomic status as compared to professional families with high levels of socioeconomic status, and that verbal interactions in families that were defined as working class fell somewhere in the middle. Additionally, professional families had far more positive verbal interactions than families in either of the two other categories. The results of the study suggest that young children who have significantly fewer verbal interactions with their parents are more likely to have language delays and vocabu laries that increase at a much slower rate than children who have high numbers of positive verbal interactions with their parents. We propose that children with native language disabilities have infrequent language experiences as well, and as a result lack certain verbal developmental capabilities that are foundational to the development of language (Keohane, Pereira-Delgado & Greer, in press). Intensive language experiences are necessary to remediate such deficits whatever the underlying cause (Greer, & Keohane, 2005; Greer, & Ross, 2008; Pistoljevic & Greer, 2006). Communication training using intensive behavioral interventions has been a key focus of instruction for children with autism who present with deficits in their listener and speaker repertoires. Communication training involves teaching the vocal operants--mands and tacts, with a view to increasing spontaneous speech emitted by the child (Pereira-Delgado, & Oblak, 2007; Pistoljevic & Greer, 2006; Schauffler & Greer, 2006). A tact is evoked by a nonverbal discriminative stimulus such as an object or event, or the relation between objects or events, and is maintained by generalised or social reinforcers (Skinner, 1957). In contrast, a mand specifies its reinforcer, is evoked by an establishing operation (EO), such as deprivation or aversive stimulation, and is maintained by specific consequences relevant to that EO (Michael, 1988). According to Skinner (1957), each verbal operant is acquired independently and serves a different function. Establishing one operant will not automatically result in the appearance of another. For example, when an utterance is established as a tact it does not automatically follow that the utterance emergences as a mand. Skinner's theoretical analysis is supported by numerous research studies on the topic (Hall & Sundberg, 1987; Lamarre & Holland, 1985; Nuzzolo-Gomez & Greer, 2004; Sundberg, San Juan, Dawdy, & Arguelles, 1990; Twyman, 1995). Skinner characterised spontaneous verbal initiations as pure mands and pure tacts (i. …