A comparison of the effects of non-operant and operant carryover techniques for /l/

Abstract

Developing strategies to promote effective carryover is one of the most difficult tasks a clinician faces. Mention has been made in the literature of possible activities to use in the clinical setting to promote carryover. Suggestion has been made in the literature that operant conditioning is a technique which can be employed to achieve carryover. The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether there is a difference in relative effectiveness between operant and non-operant techniques for achieving carryover of /1/.Six children enrolled in speech management for /1/ in the Results from this study indicate that Group I, the non-operant group, regressed in articulatory proficiency of /1/ while Group II, the operant group, showed improvement. The percent of average change for Group I was -20.5, while Group II's percent of average change was 33.3.Individual variables of the subjects and clinicians were considered for possible explanations of the differences found between the groups. Group I contained the oldest subjects, received training on fewer number of sounds than Group II and received more total minutes of speech management than Group II. Also, in comparison to the operant group, the' clinicians in the non-operant group had more years of experience in speech/language pathology in the public schools and a special dedication to my support system these past two years: