Generative strategies and teaching for generalization

Alessi, Galen

doi:10.1007/bf03392816

Cited by 88 publications

(93 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding the first question, research published in the 1960s and 1970s (i.e., around the same time as Brown and Hanlon) has provided evidence of the efficacy of positive reinforcement in children's acquisition of grammaticality. For example, Guess, Sailor, Rutherford, and Baer (1968) used reinforcement procedures to teach a severely retarded girl the generative (i.e., indirectly trained, novel; see Alessi, 1987) usage of singular and plural phonemes:…”

Section: Mythmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three Myths from the Language Acquisition Literature

Schoneberger

2010

Analysis Verbal Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three popular assertions have hindered the promotion of an empiricist approach to language acquisition: (a) that Brown and Hanlon (1970) claimed to offer data that parents do not reinforce their children's grammaticality; (b) that Brown and Hanlon also claimed to offer data that parents do not provide negative evidence (i.e., corrective feedback) for ungrammaticality; and (c) that Gold (1967) claimed to offer a formal proof showing that, without negative evidence, a child cannot acquire a language solely from environmental input. In this paper I offer introductory comments on the nature-nurture distinction (including interactionism, and the nativists' claim to have found a gene for language). Next I debunk the three aforementioned assertions by arguing that the authors (Brown & Hanlon; Gold) never made the claims attributed to them; review evidence on the role of reinforcement and corrective feedback in language acquisition; and offer some concluding comments.

show abstract

Section: Mythmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three Myths from the Language Acquisition Literature

Schoneberger

2010

Analysis Verbal Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In reading (or writing), for example, the programmed probability of reinforcement for the emission of certain sounds (or writing certain letters) in the presence of certain letters (or sounds) may vary considerably in the same language and in different languages. This quantification of the programmed contingencies may provide a more refined analysiS of what some authors have called irregular letter-phoneme relations (e.g., Alessi, 1987).…”

Section: Task Complexity and Precurrent Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

Decrease of Precurrent Behavior as Training Increases: Effects of Task Complexity

Oliveira-Castro¹,

Coelho²,

Oliveira-Castro³

1999

Psychol Rec

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…5) and with mentally retarded children's operant stimulus discrimination (Singh & Solman, 1990 autocliticframe. An autocliticframe is a statement in the form of "If X, then Y" (Alessi, 1987;Skinner, 1957, p. 359 (Tennyson & Park, 1980). For instance, Tennyson, Tennyson, and Rothen (1980) compared three presentation orders in teaching the four contingencies mentioned above.…”

Section: How Can Definition-based Conceptual Control Be Established?mentioning

confidence: 99%

An analysis of concept learning: Simple conceptual control and definition-based conceptual control

Shimamune

Malott

1995

Analysis Verbal Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concept learning can involve either contingency shaping of stimulus-class discriminations or the application of definitions of the concepts. Experimental behavior analysts have studied contingency shaping, whereas educational psychologists have studied definitional concept training.In this paper, we analyze definition-based concept learning in terms of stimulusresponse chains. Then we apply this chaining analysis to principles of instruction proposed by educational psychologists. These principles include (a) stating the definition in terms of critical and variable attributes, (b) using examples and nonexamples, (c) using a rational set of examples and nonexamples, (d) presenting coordinate concepts simultaneously, and (e) presenting the next instance based on the learner's previous error.There have been several behavior-analytic based theoretical analyses of "cognitive" behavior. For example, Hayes proposed a relational control theory relevant to semantics (Hayes, 1991(Hayes, , 1994; Palmer (1991) presented a behavior-analytic model of memory; and many researchers have discussed how descriptions of contingencies (i.e., rules) control behavior (e.g., Cerutti, 1989;Malott, 1989;Schlinger, 1993;Skinner, 1957). Most of these analyses suggest that we can interpret cognitive behavior in terms of the basic principles without using hypothetical constructs such as meanings and memory.In keeping with these analyses, the preThis paper is based on a review paper submitted by the first author to Western Michigan University in partial fulfillment of the requirement of a doctoral degree. The authors gratefully acknowledge the Associate Editor and three reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions. Requests for reprints should be sent to Satoru Shimamune, now affiliated with the

show abstract

Generative strategies and teaching for generalization

Cited by 88 publications

References 4 publications

Three Myths from the Language Acquisition Literature

Three Myths from the Language Acquisition Literature

Decrease of Precurrent Behavior as Training Increases: Effects of Task Complexity

An analysis of concept learning: Simple conceptual control and definition-based conceptual control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About