Appreciation is expressed to David Gast for the time he spent conducting training sessions, to Janet Striefel for preparation of the figures in this manuscript, and to Dr. Joseph Spradlin, Dr. Robert Fulton, and the editors of the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis for their critical comments concerning the manuscript. This research was supported by grant HD 00870 from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Child Health and Human Development.
INSTRUCTION-FOLLOWING BEHAVIOR OF A RETARDED CHILD AND ITS CONTROLLING STIMULI1
Article first published online: 27 FEB 2013
1973 Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
Volume 6, Issue 4, pages 663–670, Winter 1973
How to Cite
Striefel, S. and Wetherby, B. (1973), INSTRUCTION-FOLLOWING BEHAVIOR OF A RETARDED CHILD AND ITS CONTROLLING STIMULI. Jnl of Applied Behav Analysis, 6: 663–670. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1973.6-663
- Issue published online: 27 FEB 2013
- Article first published online: 27 FEB 2013
- Received 28 February 1973; Revision requested 21 May 1973; Final acceptance 11 July 1973
A combination of positive reinforcement and fading of physical guidance was used to teach a profoundly retarded boy specific responses to specific verbal instructions. The design consisted of a multiple baseline of probe data across different verbal instructions. The subject started responding correctly to each verbal instruction as that item was trained in a multiple-baseline order. Generalization did not occur to items that had not yet been trained, nor did it occur to items included to assess generalization. Probes of variations in the verbal instructions, conducted after training was completed, revealed that generalization was minimal except in those cases where the variation consisted of the verb only, the noun only, the noun plus preposition, or where the verb of the instruction was presented last. Training a profoundly retarded 11-yr-old subject to respond to specific verbal instructions did not adequately facilitate the development of a generative instruction-following capability, nor did all verbal elements of the instruction control a specific response.