Acquisition and generalization of divergent intraverbal responses in children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder

Abstract

This study examined the effects of intraverbal instruction with a fluency training component on the acquisition of divergent intraverbal responding and generalization to function, feature, and class (FFC) questions with two children (6 and 8 years old) diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. The instructional targets were chosen based on a conceptual analysis of prerequisite relations that were likely to be sufficient for intraverbal emergence to occur. It was expected that with these prerequisites in place, direct teaching of a subset of divergent intraverbal responses might generalize across FFC questions. In baseline, participants emitted three or fewer intraverbal responses to most questions. Instruction with tact prompts and transfer‐of‐control trials initially produced only small increases in intraverbal responding, whereas the addition of fluency training quickly produced criterion‐level performance. Further, both participants demonstrated generalization to untrained FFC questions. Pre‐ and post‐tests revealed concomitant increases in responses to reverse intraverbal FFC questions and FFC questions presented in an intraverbal webbing format.

Emergent Intraverbal and Reverse Intraverbal Behavior Following Listener Training in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

“…However, the purpose of the study was not to show or to propose that listener training is the most effective way of establishing emergent intraverbal responding. Indeed, studies have shown that tact training typically is more effective in establishing intraverbal responding than listener training both in typically developing individuals as well as in individuals with ASD (e.g., Allan et al, 2015;Cortez et al, 2020;Petursdottir et al, 2008a, b;Thakore & Petursdottir, 2021). Rather, we sought to examine whether intraverbal and reverse intraverbal relations could emerge after listener training to demonstrate how behavior analysts may account for verbal behavior emerging without a direct reinforcement history.…”

“…Although, previous studies have implemented listener training and probed for the emergence of reverse intraverbals in typically developing children (e.g., Cortez et al, 2020;Petursdottir et al, 2008b), only three studies have examined the emergence of reverse intraverbal responding in children with ASD (Allan et al, 2015;Dickes & Kodak, 2015;Thakore & Petursdottir, 2021). In Allan et al (2015), intraverbal training included multiple exemplars taught concurrently, constant promptdelay procedures, programmed reinforcement, and bidirectional stimulus-response teaching formats.…”

“…Three of four participants showed emergence of reverse intraverbals following intraverbal training. Thakore and Petursdottir (2021) examined the effects of intraverbal instruction using fluency training on the acquisition of divergent intraverbal responding in two children with ASD. Teaching with tact prompts produced only small increases in intraverbal responding, whereas the addition of fluency training quickly produced criterion-level performance.…”

A scoping review of empirical research on emergent intraverbal behavior

“…Of note, we identified five experiments (5%) that directly reinforced emergent intraverbal responses during probe sessions, in contrast to the seeming consensus and general recommendations mentioned above (e.g., Grow & Kodak, 2010; Sidman, 2000). All five experiments were conducted either with children with ASD (Rodriguez et al., 2022; Smith et al., 2016; Thakore & Petursdottir, 2021; Valentino & Shillingsburg, 2011) or with adults with developmental disabilities (Ziomek & Rehfeldt, 2008). These studies were also distributed toward the more recent publication dates identified in our review (see Figure 2).…”

A translational evaluation of component skills for the establishment of multiply controlled intraverbals

“…Examples of simple discriminative control include responding to a word with its foreign language referent (e.g., saying “cachorro” after hearing “dog”) or stating related items (e.g., saying “socks” after hearing “shoes”). Only a handful of investigations have evaluated procedures for establishing divergent (e.g., Braam & Poling, 1983; Goldsmith et al, 2007; Kisamore et al, 2011; Lee et al, 2017; Thakore & Petursdottir, 2022) or convergent control (e.g., Braam & Poling, 1983; DeSouza et al, 2019; Rodriguez et al, 2022).…”