Reading Words Using the Go/No-Go Procedure with Compound Stimuli with Preschool Children

Canovas, Daniela de Souza; Queiroz, Anna Carolina Muller; Debert, Paula; Hübner, Maria Martha Costa

doi:10.1007/s40732-019-00339-4

Cited by 9 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the pretest for the CD relation (printed word and textual response) for all sets, none of the participants emitted vocal responses that corresponded to the textual stimuli that were presented. Similar to Canovas et al (2019), vocal responses with point-to-point correspondence to the textual stimuli emerged only after training. This could be interpreted as an emergent response resulting from transfer of function after the establishment of an equivalence class.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…Another similarity to Canovas et al (2019) was that most of the participants required fewer sessions to reach the criterion in training with subsequent sets after previous sets were learned. These results are similar to previous studies that utilized MTS to teach reading (e.g., de Rose et al, 1996;Hanna et al, 2011;Hübner et al, 2009;Matos et al, 2006).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These prerequisite skills include visual scanning arrays containing multiple stimuli and discriminating between sample stimuli when presented successively (Green, 2001). Canovas et al (2019) discussed the analysis and development of alternatives to the MTS procedure to expand teaching procedures to account for the variation in repertoires and prerequisite skills. One alternative is the Go/No-Go procedure with compound stimuli, which allows training of conditional relations and produces emergent relations (e.g., Boldrin et al, 2016;Brandão et al, 2014;Campos et al, 2011Campos et al, , 2015Canovas et al, 2019;Debert et al, 2007Debert et al, , 2009Grisante et al, 2013;Modenesi & Debert, 2015;Perez et al, 2009;Silva & Debert, 2017;Vernucio & Debert, 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given these potential benefits of the Go/No-Go procedure with compound stimuli, it could be a useful alternative to the MTS procedure to teach reading comprehension. Canovas et al (2019) were the first to investigate whether the Go/No-Go procedure with compound stimuli (Debert et al, 2007) allowed the establishment of reading comprehension, as defined by Sidman and Tailby (1982), in typically developing children. In this study, compound stimuli were successively presented, and the participant had the option to press the space bar upon each stimulus presentation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although Canovas et al (2019) demonstrated the establishment of posttested relations, BC and CB relations were not pretested. Because the stimuli used in this study represented items that the children may be exposed to outside the experimental context, pretesting BC and CB relations would provide additional control for extra-experimental confounds.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Reading comprehension with the Go/No‐Go procedure with compound stimuli

Gueiros

Debert

2020

J of App Behav Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study investigated whether the Go/No-Go procedure with compound stimuli produces emergent relations among dictated words (A), pictures (B), and printed words (C) and the emergence of textual behavior (CD) using a multiple probe design across word sets. Three preschool children were exposed to 4 phases: (1) pretests for BC, CB, and CD relations, (2) pretraining with known stimuli, (3) AB and AC training, and (4) posttests for BC, CB, and CD relations. During AB and AC training, responses to A1B1, A2B2, A1C1, and A2C2 compound stimuli, but not to A1B2, A2B1, A1C2, and A2C1, were reinforced. The results showed that all participants met the learning criterion and demonstrated emergence of BC and CB relations (i. e., relations between pictures and printed words), and CD relations (i.e., textual behavior) after training. These results suggest that the Go/No-Go procedure with compound stimuli is an effective alternative for establishing reading comprehension.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Reading comprehension with the Go/No‐Go procedure with compound stimuli

Gueiros

Debert

2020

J of App Behav Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Equivalence class formation when responding is separated from sample and comparison stimuli: Working memory, priming, and sorting

Fields

Doran

Foxe

2020

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The experiment determined whether equivalence class formation required overlap of comparison stimuli and responding. Each trial contained a sample first, a single, nonoverlapping comparison second, and a nonoverlapping response‐window (RW) third, during which the participant made one of two responses (2R). All 11 participants formed two 3‐member ABC equivalence classes using these “trace‐stimulus‐pairing two‐response with response window” (TSP‐2R‐RW) trials. After adding a fourth stimulus (D) by CD training, ABCD tests showed immediate expansion to 4‐member ABCD classes. When 4‐member probes (AD, DA, BD, DB, CD, DC) were administered without 3‐member probes, many participants showed decrements in class‐indicative responding that then resurged to mastery with test repetition. Thus, 3‐member probes enhanced class expansion. Class formation occurred for all participants when responding was temporally dissociated from the comparisons. In a matched, contemporaneously published experiment, where responding occurred during comparisons, only 54% of participants formed the classes. Thus, the comparison‐response‐separation nearly doubled class formation. Additionally, a special post‐class‐formation sorting test documented the emergence of two explicit equivalence classes. Finally, we noted a 1:1 correspondence for TSP‐2R‐RW and priming trials. Since priming measures neural substrates of equivalence classes, TSP‐2R‐RW trials should do the same.

show abstract