Observational learning and children with autism: discrimination training of known and unknown stimuli

Abstract

We extended past observational learning research by incorporating stimuli already known to participants into training. We used a multiple-baseline design across three participants to determine the effects of discrimination training on the discrimination of consequences applied to modeled responses using both known and unknown pictures. During baseline, participants were exposed to modeled correct and incorrect picture labels and were observed to imitate modeled responses that were incorrect and followed by negative feedback. During discrimination training, we taught participants to label known pictures regardless of observed responses and consequences. With unknown pictures, we taught participants to imitate correct and reinforced modeled responses, and to say, "I don't know," when modeled responses were incorrect and received negative feedback. Test sessions measured responding to known and unknown pictures and showed acquisition over baseline levels. Generalization to pictures not associated with training was variable. Implications for teaching observational learning to children with autism are discussed.

Effects of differential observing responses on observational learning across multiple contingencies

“…The number of observation opportunities and sequence of observation and response opportunities varied across the hidden-item and verbal-operant contingencies. In contrast with previous research (DeQuinzio & Taylor, 2015;DeQuinzio et al, 2018;, observation opportunities for verbal-operant contingencies comprised correct and incorrect responses to the same antecedent stimulus rather than only correct or incorrect responses. In detail, the model performed one correct and two incorrect responses per antecedent stimulus, thereby increasing the number of incorrect responses performed, which served as a control technique to increase the believability that the child's correct responses in response opportunities were due to OL.…”

“…The model used a variable-ratio schedule of reinforcement to deliver a preferred item contingent on watching during observation opportunities. In contrast with previous research (DeQuinzio & Taylor, 2015;DeQuinzio et al, 2018;, the model, rather than teacher, facilitated watching to maintain consistency across the hidden-item and verbal-operant contingencies because the model was always present. That is, we erred on the side of caution and had the model deliver prompts to maintain consistency across all contingencies because having the model deliver prompts with the hidden-item contingencies and the teacher deliver prompts with the verbal-operant contingencies would constitute a difference.…”

“…After the child performed at mastery (i.e., at least 80% independent DORs for the model's behavior across three consecutive sessions), teaching the DOR for the consequence procedures was initiated. In contrast with previous research showing that children with ASD will imitate the behavior performed by the model regardless of whether it is correct or incorrect and doing so may hinder OL (DeQuinzio et al, 2018), we taught children to respond differentially to all behaviors performed by the model as an objective measure confirming they attended to responses that contacted reinforcement and responses that did not contact reinforcement.…”

“…Researchers have conceptually and experimentally identified attending, imitation, delayed imitation, and consequence discrimination as component skills of OL (Delgado & Greer, 2009;DeQuinzio & Taylor, 2015;DeQuinzio et al, 2018;MacDonald & Ahearn, 2015;Masia & Chase, 1997;Palmer, 2012;. Assessing the effects of the component skills on OL entails performing contingencies for an observer in an observation opportunity and subsequently testing what the observer learned in a response opportunity.…”

“…One purpose of our study was to systematically extend MacDonald and Ahearn by testing OL across a host of contingencies with different stimulus modalities. In addition to the hidden-item and receptive-identification contingencies, OL with tacts (Delgado & Greer, 2009;DeQuinzio & Taylor, 2015;DeQuinzio et al, 2018), and intraverbals (Leaf et al, 2013) should be tested because these skills are common focus areas in early intensive behavioral intervention (Lovaas & Smith, 2003;Sundberg & Partington, 1998;Taylor & McDonough, 1996).…”