1

The Role of the Motivating Operation in Teaching Children with Autism

Vincent J. Carbone Ed.D., BCBA-D NYS Licensed Behavior Analyst

Carbone Clinic

New York – Boston – Dubai www.CarboneClinic.com

IESCUM

Parma, Italy December 1,2 & 3, 2016

2

The Basic Principles Related to The Strength of the Operant

ANTECEDENT BEH CONSEQUENCES

Stimulus Control Reinforcement SD Pos., Neg. and Automatic

S-Delta Cond. And Uncond.

Punishment Motivation Pos. and Neg. and Automatic

Cond and Uncond Surrogate, Transitive, Extinction Reflexive

The Operant MO/ SD- Response Class -Consequence

Michael refers to behavioral variables that serve as consequences as function altering variables. In other

words, they alter the function of stimuli that are correlated with the behavior consequence relation, e.g. antecedent stimuli.

He refers to antecedent behavioral variables as behavior altering in that they momentarily alter some

dimension of behavior, e.g. MO’s and SD’s. For a complete overview of his analysis of this topic, see Jack Michael’s Concepts and Principles (2003).

Sp

2

3

MOTIVATING OPERATIONS

4

Credit

• A number of the slides contained in this presentation were developed and presented in other contexts by Dr. Jack Michael, and have been placed without modification into this presentation with Dr. Michael’s permission.

3

5

Definitions of Important Terms and Concepts

Papers

Michael 1982, JEAB McGill, 1999, JABA

Laraway et al, 2003 JABA Langthorne and McGill, 2009 BAP

Carbone, et al., 2010 Focus on Autism… Laraway et al., 2014 Psychological Record

Motivating Operations

• When discussing motivation behavior analysts make us of the

concept of establishing operation (Michael, 1982) and then later the

motivating operation (Laraway, Syncerski, Michael & Poling, 2003)

• In this talk about teaching children with autism I will discuss two

important motivational variables; the conditioned reflexive motivating

operating (CMO-R) and the conditioned transitive motivating

operation (CMO-T)

• We’ll start our discussion with a brief overview of the development of

the concept of the motivating operation and then discuss how these

concepts relate to the teaching of children with autism.

6

4

Brief History of Motivation In Behavior Analysis

• Motivation in behavior analysis has frequently been

confused with the role of reinforcement as a consequence.

• The clear identification of motivation as an environmental

variable as an antecedent event began with the publication

of B. F. Skinner’s Behavior of Organisms (1938).

• Skinner included two chapters devoted to motivation

• He argued against the term “drive.” Skinner asserted that,

“The ‘drive’ is a hypothetical state interpolated between

operation and behavior and is not actually required in a

descriptive system.” (p. 368)

7

• Moreover, he differentiated between motivational control and

stimulus control by declaring that a “Drive is Not a Stimulus”.

• He relied on the operations of deprivation/satiation and

presentation of aversive stimuli to describe motivation.

• Keller and Schoenfeld’s book Principles of Psychology (1950)

– This book contained a chapter devoted to and titled “Motivation.” It contained several refinements to the topic of motivation (Sundberg, 2005)

• They further developed the analysis of deprivation/satiation and response strength.

• They provided detailed analysis of how an aversive stimulus can function as a motivational variable.

8

5

• Keller and Schoenfeld gave a name to a newly discovered behavioral variable, “The establishing operation (my emphasis) is our independent variable, the behavior our dependent variable; the former is specifiable as to kind and degree, the latter is measured by the extent of change. The concomitant variation of the two gives rise to, and defines, the concept and problem of motivation” (Keller & Schoenfeld,1950, p. 273).

• In the book Verbal Behavior (1957) Skinner provided a comprehensive analysis of how motivational variables contribute to a human’s initial acquisition of language (Sundberg, 2005).

• It is here that he introduced the concept of the mand and argued that it was separate from the other operants because of its control by motivational variables, rather than discriminative stimuli. He also described how motivational variables could be manipulated to evoke verbal behavior.

9

Refinement of the Concept of the EO Michael Pics

Through a series of writings, Michael (1982; 1988; 1993; 2000; 2007) refined the concept and principle of the establishing operation (EO) and defined it as an:

“environmental event, operation, or stimulus condition that affects an organism by momentarily altering a) the reinforcing value of other events and b) and alters the frequency of behavior that has produced what is now valued”.

• Michael (1993) described two (2) types of EOs:

Unconditioned and Conditioned. Unconditioned EOs (UEOs) are “events or operations or stimulus conditions whose value altering effects are unlearned,” Conditioned EOs (CEOs) “value altering effects have been learned during the individual organism’s learning history.”

10

6

• Michael (1993) identified and for the first time clearly

described three (3) different types of CEOs or CMOs. There are three types of CMOs as described by Michael (1993, 2007):

1. Conditioned Transitive Motivating Operation (CMO-T) 2. Conditioned Reflexive Motivating Operation (CMO-R) 3. Conditioned Surrogate Motivating Operation (CMO-S

• All three (3) have been implicated as behavioral variables within the applied research related to the treatment of persons with autism and developmental disabilities. (For a review of the CMO-R and CMO-T see, Carbone, 2013).

• As a result of Michael’s writings on the topic and

terminological revision from “establishing operation” (EO) to “motivating operation” (MO), (Laraway,Syncerski,Michael & Poling, 2003) the concept gained recognition as an important variable in clinical practice.

11

12

Establishing Operations (EOs) Two Defining Effects

Reinforcer Establishing Effect

EO’s alter the current reinforcing effectiveness of some stimulus, object, or event. (And reinforcer establishing should be taken to include the effect in the opposite direction, called reinforcer abolishing.)

Evocative Effect

EO’s alter the current frequency of all types of behavior that have been reinforced by the same stimulus, object, or event that is altered in reinforcing effectiveness by the same EO. (And evocative should be taken to include the effect in the opposite direction, called abative.)

7

13

A Change in Terms from EO to MO

• This Laraway et al. (2003) paper proposed that behavior analysts should consider using value altering effect to replace reinforcer establishing effect as a generic description of a change in the effectiveness of any operant consequence (411).

• “Value-altering effects comprise the (a) reinforcer-establishing, (b) reinforcer-abolishing, (c ) punisher-establishing,and (d) punisher-

abolishing effects of MOs (Laraway 411).

14

• In addition, the authors proposed that instead of using evocative effect in the bidirectional sense advocated by Michael, in the interest of accuracy, behavior analysts should consider using behavior-altering effect as a generic description of MOs’ effects on behavior (411)

• They suggested to use the verb evoke to describe an increase and the verb abate to describe in responding due to the action of antecedents.

– Two effects are then possible: An Evocative Effect and an Abative Effect.

8

15

Table of MO Effects

Motivative Operations (MOs)

Two Defining Effects

Value-Altering Effect Behavior-Altering Effect

ReinforcerEstablishingEffect:

ReinforcerAbolishingEffect

Evocative Effect:increase in thecurrent freq.

Abative Effect:decrease in thecurrent freq.

MOs alter the behavior of all typesof responding that have beenreinforced by the same stimulus,object, or event that is altered invalue by the same MO.

MOs alter the currentreinforcing effectivenessof some stimulus, object,or event.

food depriva-tion increaseseffectivenessof food asrfmt.

foodingestiondecreaseseffectivenessof food asrfmt.

food depriva-tion increases current freq.of allbehavior thatwasreinforcedwith food.

food ingestiondecreasescurrent freq.of all beha-vior that wasrfed. withfood.

Definition

16

• A motivating operation is any set of events, stimulus, or condition that alters

the value of some stimulus as a reinforcer or punisher and alters the

frequency of some response that has produced that consequence (Michael,

1993).

• Michael (1993, 2007) states that motivating operations have two defining

features:

1. They alter the reinforcing value upward or downward of some other

stimulus

and

2. They alter some dimension of a response associated with the change in

reinforcing value of a stimulus that has followed it.

• In other words, motivating operations:

1. ESTABLISH or ABOLISH the reinforcing value of another stimulus. This

is called the VALUE-ALTERING EFFECT. The two terms for the value

altering effects are Establishing Operation and Abolishing Operation.

and

2. EVOKE or ABATE a response. This is called the BEHAVIOR-ALTERING

EFFECT. The two terms for the behavior altering effects are Evocative

Effect and Abative Effect.

9

Examples

17

• Food deprivation is a motivating operation because it:

1. Alters upward the value of food as a reinforcer

(Establishing Effect)

And

2. Evokes all behaviors that have, in the past, produced

food as a form of reinforcement (Evocative Effect)

• Food ingestion (satiation) is a motivating operation because it:

1. Alters downward the value of food as a reinforcer

(Abolishing Effect)

And

2. Abates all behaviors that have, in the past, produced

food (Abative Effect).

ACTIVITY # 1

ACTIVITY # 2

18

10

19

A Critical Distinction: Motivating vs. Discriminative Relations; EO vs. SD

• Both EOs and SDs are learned, operant, antecedent, evocative/abative relations.

• SDs evoke (S∆s abate) because of the differential availability of a reinforcer.

• EOs evoke or abate because of the differential effectiveness of a reinforcer

The General Contrast

Definition of SD- A stimulus that has been positively correlated with the availability of reinforcement for a class of responses.

Definition of an MO- A stimulus, event or operation that establishes or abolishes the value of another stimulus and therefore either evokes or abates any behavior that produces that stimulus.

20

ACTIVITY

Is it an SD or an MO?

Test# 1

1. Does the antecedent stimulus or operation alter the value

of the consequence or alter the availability of the

consequence? In most cases the question is: “Is

reinforcement now more valuable or more available?

11

21

TEST # 1

Is Food Deprivation an SD or an MO for

Obtaining Food?

Question- When Deprived of food is it more available or

valuable?

------------------------------------

Is Pain an SD or and MO for Taking an Analgesic?

Question- When pain occurs is pain removal more

valuable or available?

-----------------------------------------

Is Social Deprivation an SD or MO for Attention

Seeking Behavior?

Question- Is social attention more valuable or available?

22

Is it an SD or an MO? TEST # 2

1. Does the antecedent stimulus or operation alter the value of the consequence or alter the availability of the consequence? In most cases the question is: “Is reinforcement now more valuable or more available?

2. TEST # 2: Can the conditions necessary to develop an SD occur?

The first test is fairly straightforward in most cases.

The second test is a little more complicated and discussed on the next few slides.

12

23

Development of an SD Both Conditions Must Occur

Skinner video

1. SD Condition: MO - Stimulus - Response - Sr+

2. S∆ Condition: MO - NO Stimulus - Response - NO Sr+

EXAMPLE

Light On as an SD

SD Condition Food Deprivation/ light on – R – Food Reinf

S∆ Condition Food Deprivation/ light off - R - NO food Reinforcer

Note first that in both conditions necessary for the development of an SD

motivation for the scheduled reinforcer must be above a value of zero and to be most effective the motivation should be of high value.

Over time the events depicted above (history) results in differential availability of reinforcement in the presence of the stimulus and therefore evokes behavior that has produced the reinforcer in the SD condition and suppresses responding the S∆ condition due to extinction.

24

TEST for: Food Deprivation as a Possible SD?

Is food more valuable or available when deprived of food? Answer is straight forward.

But second test requires the following:

Two SD requirements: (1)Food wanted, R has been reinforced with food in SD and (2)

Food wanted, R has occurred w/o food rfmt. in S∆,

SD Condition: MO - Stimulus - Response - Sr+

Food Deprivation - Food Deprivation------ Pecking ---- Food

S∆ Condition: MO - NO Stimulus - Response - NO Sr+

Satiation/No MO Satiation Pecking? No Food

(1) SD Condition (Food Deprivation): Food deprivation meets the first requirement.

Food has been available and has typically followed R in the presence of food

deprivation.

(2) S-Delta Condition (Satiation) R may have occurred w/o being followed by food in

S∆, but when deprivation was not present (during food satiation) food would not have

been effective as reinforcement.

The decrease in responding in this case was not due to extinction.

Note that the S-Delta condition can not meet the requirement necessary to develop an

SD.

Food deprivation is an MO not an SD

13

25

TEST for: Pain as a Possible SD?

Is pain reduction (reinforcer) more available or valuable when in pain.? Again, answer is

straight forward.

But what about the second test requirements,

Two SD requirements: (1) Pain Present, R has been reinforced with pain reduction in SD

(painful stim. present) and (2) Pain Present R has occurred w/o pain reduction rfmt.

in S∆

SD Condition: MO - Stimulus - Response - Sr+

Pain - Pain ------ Pecking ---- Pain Reduction

S∆ Condition: MO - NO Stimulus - Response - NO Sr+

No Pain /No MO No Pain Pecking? No Pain Reduction

(1) Pain (Sd) Pain reduction has been available and typically followed R in the

presence of pain.

(2) (2) NO Pain (S-Delta) R may have occurred w/o being followed by pain reduction in

S∆ but when pain reduction was not present pain reduction was not effective as

reinforcement.

Any decrease in responding is not due to extinction.

Note that the S-Delta condition can not meet the requirement necessary to develop an SD.

Pain is an MO not an SD

26

Summary of Differences

• Discriminative stimuli evoke or abate behavior due to their positive or negative correlation with the availability of reinforcement.

• Motivating Operations evoke or abate behavior because of their value altering and behavior altering effects.

• They have the same effect but their mechanisms for evoking behavior are quite different and therefore they are different behavioral variables.

• Failure to distinguish between the two will result in less effective clinical practices.

14

27

The Analysis of Verbal Behavior 2013, 29, 45–49

SKINNER’S CLASSIFICATION OF LANGUAGE

15

Behavioral Classification of Language Skinner’s (Nature’s) Categories

Primary Verbal Behaviors Non-Verbal Behavior

Listener Behavior (Receptive)

Intraverbal (“Wh” questions)

Echoic (Vocal/Manual Sign Imitation)

Tact (Labeling)

Mand (Requesting)

29

Motivation and Teaching the Mand

• The Mand is a verbal operant that specifies its reinforcer and therefore is

under the control of motivation or a motivating operation.

• While Skinner never used the term establishing or motivating operation

he clearly identified the role of motivation in the acquisition of the mand

repertoire.

• He described the mand as under the control of conditions of

deprivation/satiation and aversion.

• He identified the mand as the only verbal operant that was not under the

control of a discriminative stimulus but instead motivation.

• Consequently, there are advantages of teaching the mand almost

immediately in training programs for children with autism. (See Sundberg

& Michael, 2010, for a complete analysis)

• First of all, when motivation is high the mand may be the easiest verbal

skill for a child to acquire initially.

30

16

• Next, the child learns a method to effectively control the social

environment and therefore may reduce problem behavior.

• Mand teaches the speaker listener relationship that will be necessary for

the development of complex social behavior and other verbal responses.

• It appears the mand may teach the first appropriate type of social

initiation to some children.

• Mand training correlates other persons (listeners) with reinforcement and

therefore may help to condition the attention of others as a reinforcer.

• Manding benefits the speaker and therefore should make language

training overall easier for the child and the teachers.

• Therefore, it would be quite reasonable for mand training to be the focus

of early language training programs. (Sundberg & Michael, 2010)

31

32

Teaching Procedures for Mand Training

VOCAL MANDING Echoic to Mand Transfer

Establish MO------------------------ Vocal Prompt------------------ Mand-----Reinforce

Item Prompt

Fade Vocal Prompt

Fade Item

MO-------------------------------------MAND------------------------Reinforce

MANUAL SIGN MANDING Mimetic to Mand Transfer

Establish MO------------------------Vocal Prompt-------------Mand---------Reinforce

Item Prompt

Physical Prompt

Model Prompt MANDING VIDEOS

Fade All Prompts

MO----------------------------------------MAND-----------------------Reinforce R

17

33

34

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Baseline Rolling Prompt Delay and Prompt Fade Generalization and Maintanence

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 100

Fry

Lollipop

Pretzel

Chip

Freq

uen

cy o

f M

O C

on

tro

lled

Man

ds

per

Ses

sio

n

Figure 1. Frequency of MO controlled mands per session during baseline (BL), treatment, and generalization and maintenance conditions for all targeted items for Martin.

Sessions

° = Frequency of MO controlled mands per session

without a prompt

• = Frequency of MO controlled mands per session

with a prompt

Sweeney-Kerwin, E. J., et al. (2007).

18

35

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73

Biscuit

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Bacon

Baseline Rolling Prompt Delay and Prompt Fade

Freq

uen

cy o

f M

O C

on

tro

lled

Man

ds

per

Ses

sio

n

Sessions

° = Frequency of MO controlled mands per session without a prompt

• = Frequency of MO controlled mands per session with a prompt

Figure 2. Frequency of MO controlled mands per session during baseline (BL) and treatment conditions for Jeff.

Sweeney-Kerwin, E. J., et al. (2007).

Max Video

The Role of the Conditioned Reflexive Motivating Operation (CMO-R) During Discrete Trial Instruction of

Children with Autism

36

19

37

38

CEO-R ANIMAL LABORATORY EXAMPLE

Reflexive MO Definition: Warning Stimulus

When a previously neutral stimulus is correlated with a worsening set of conditions, presentation of that stimulus : Value Altering Effect- establishes termination of the stimulus as a reinforcer. Behavior Altering Effect – evokes all behaviors that have terminated the stimulus

tone off

shock off tone on shock off

tone on shock on

30" 5"

R1

R2

R1 = lever press, the

avoidance rsp.

R2 = chain pull, the

escape rsp. J. Michael

20

39

CEO-R Exercise # 1 CEO-R Class Exercise

Assume that the organism has had exposure to the escape avoidance paradigm displayed in the previous slide, answer the following:

40

CEO-R Human examples Everyday social interactions.

• The CEO-R is important in identifying a negative

aspect of many everyday interactions that might seem

free of deliberate aversiveness. The interactions are

usually interpreted as a sequence of SD--->R

interactions, with each one being an opportunity for

one person to provide some form of rfmt to the other

person. But there is a slightly darker side to everyday

life.

21

41

i. Response to a request for information: You are on campus and stranger asks you where the library is. The appropriate R is give the information or say that you don't know. What evokes your answer? The request. What reinforces your response? The person asking will smile and thank you. Also you will be rfed by the knowledge that you have helped another person.

42

CEO-R Human examples Everyday social interactions (cont'd.)

So the request is an SD. But, it also begins a brief

period that can be considered a warning stimulus, and

if a rsp is not made soon, some form of mild social

worsening will occur. The asker may repeat the

question, more clearly or loudly, and will think you are

strange if you do not respond. You, yourself, would

consider your behavior socially inappropriate if you did

not respond quickly.

22

43

Even with no clear threat implied for non-responding, our social history implies some form of worsening for continued inappropriate behavior. So, the request plus the brief following period is in part a CEO-R in evoking the response. It is best considered a mixture of positive and negative parts. But when the question is an inconvenience (e.g. when you are in a rush to get some-where) the CEO-R is probably the main component.

44

Human examples Everyday social interactions (cont'd.)

ii."Thanks"

When a person does something for another that is a

kindness of some sort, it is customary for the recipient

of the kindness to thank the person performing the

kindness, who then typically says "You're welcome."

What evokes the thanking rsp, and what is its rfmt?

23

45

Clearly it is evoked by the person's performing the kindness. And the "You're welcome" acknowledgment is the obvious rfmt. So the kindness is an SD in the presence of which a "Thanks" response can receive a "You're welcome." But what if the recipient fails to thank the donor? The performance of the kindness is also a CEO-R that begins a period that functions like a warning stimulus. Failure to thank is inappropriate.

Clinical Application of the CMO-R

46

• DEFINITION OF CMO-R, any stimulus which has been repeatedly correlated with a worsening set of conditions will come to function as a CMO-R, in that the onset of this stimulus will establish its own termination (removal) as a form of reinforcement and will evoke any behaviors that have previously produced such reinforcement.

• An analysis of the typical instructional setting for many learners with autism provides an example of the development of CMO-R:

• The teaching of some children with autism requires the presentation of many instructional demands each day.

• Many of these learners have a history that has established the presence of the teacher, the teaching context, and the presentation of the instructional demand as an aversive condition and therefore evokes problem behavior which interferes with learning. Michael (1993, 2000) identifies these antecedent stimuli as reflexive conditioned establishing operations (changed to condition reflexive motivating operations (CMOs-R) in 2003).

• Consistent with this analysis, teacher presence, instructional materials, and teacher instructional demands may all act as CMOs-R for some learners and therefore evoke problem behavior that interferes with learning. The reported high rates of problem behavior evoked by discrete trial training with some children (Lovaas, 1982, 2003) may be related to the CMO-R.

24

Discrete Trial Instruction

• Discrete trial instruction (DTI) has been demonstrated to be an

effective method of treatment and education for persons with autism

(Smith, 2001).

• The instructional method includes a teacher presenting instructional

material in a precise and sequenced manner so that it evokes

frequent responses to the material by the learner.

• Following each learner response the teacher presents a

consequence that usually takes the form of some type of feedback

that either indicates the responses are correct or incorrect.

• Correct responses usually result in a suspected form of

reinforcement to strengthen the responses.

47

• Following incorrect responses the teacher provides feedback indicating an error and usually conducts an error correction procedure.

• The instructional demands could be in the form of presentation of verbal responses of the teacher (What is it? Touch your nose, etc.), presentation of nonverbal stimuli (pictures, objects to match), or some combination of both (Tell me which one you drink from).

• WHAT SKILLS ARE TAUGHT USING DTI ?

• DTI instruction can be used to teach almost any skill in any environment.

• In this context we are talking about teaching skills that are representative of the core deficits of persons with autism at a desk or instructional table.

48

25

The skills taught during DTI at an instructional table usually include

the following:

1. listener behavior (commands and selection)

2. tacting (labeling)

3. motor imitation

4. visual performance (matching, sorting, etc )

5. intraverbal behavior ( responding to what is said)

6. echoic responses

• For our purposes today we are specifically discussing DTI in

the context of presentation of instructional demands by an

instructor at a table during one on one instruction.

Sylvia Video

49

50

• A thorough conceptual understanding of motivation and a well-

developed practical repertoire related to modifying instructional

variables that will reduce the aversiveness of teaching and reduce

problem behavior maintained by escape or avoidance can result in a

more comprehensive analysis of an instructional situation and

improved selection of appropriate instructional methods.

(Michael, 2000).

26

• Let’s first look at an infrahuman experimental preparation related to the

CMO-R.

• Then we’ll look at the following two diagrams to discuss an applied

clinical example. The following two diagrams depict an experimental

preparation related to the development of a discriminated avoidance

response. In other words, they show an analysis of how stimuli might

be engendered with aversive properties and conditioned as CMO-R.

• The first diagram presents an analysis of how this occurs in the

animal laboratory setting.

• The second diagram presents an analysis of how this occurs in

the context of teaching.

• Both examples show how a previously neutral stimulus, after being

consistently followed by a worsening set of conditions, comes to

function as a warning stimulus for that worsening set of conditions. As

a result, an avoidance response comes to be evoked by the

presentation of the warning stimulus.

51

52

27

Development of the CMO-R in the Laboratory

53

Neutral Stimulus “Painful Stimulation” Effects

(Tone) Presentation of

Stimulus, Object or

Event

Time

→

(Shock) Worsening Set of

Conditions =

Termination of Worsening

Condition is a Reinforcer &

Evokes Behavior That Has

Been So Reinforced

After repeated correlations in the above sequence…

Warning Stimulus Effects

(CMO-R)

(Tone) Presentation of Stimulus,

Object or Event

Establishes Termination of

Warning Stimulus (tone) as a

Reinforcer and Evokes

Behavior That Has Led to its

Termination

=

After repeated presentations of the above sequence……..

54

Warning Stimulus Effects

(CMO-R)

Establishes Termination of

the Warning Stimuli as a

Reinforcer and Evokes all

Responses That Have Led to

Their Removal

Presentation of

Instructional Demands,

Instructional Materials

and Presence of

Teacher

=

28

Development of the CMO-R in the Classroom

Neutral “Painful Stimulation” Effects

Stimulus (Worsening Set of Conditions)

55

Presentation of

Instructional

Demands,

Instructional

Materials and

Presence of

Teacher

Session Begins with Removal of

Positive Reinforcement

Low value Positive Reinforcement

Low rate of Positive Reinforcement

Frequent Social Disapproval

Effortful Responses Required

Difficult Responses Required

High Rate of Demands

Frequent Learner Errors

Delayed Positive Reinforcement

Low magnitude Positive

Reinforcement

Termination of

Worsening

Condition

is a Reinforcer

& Evokes

Behavior That

Has Been so

Reinforced

=

Time

→

Implications for Instruction

• When trying to reduce problem behavior that occurs during instruction, three methods of treatment are frequently used:

• Differential reinforcement plus extinction

• Functional communication training (FCT) plus extinction

• Abolish the CMO-R

• Michael (2000) suggests a practical solution to this problem may involve the use of escape extinction (i.e., maintain demands when problem behavior occurs). In fact, escape extinction along with differential reinforcement of alternative behaviors (DRA) is the most common form of intervention for learners with autism who emit problem behavior when instructional demands are presented (Lovaas, 2003). Practitioners sometimes refer to this process as “working through” the problem behavior.

• Failure to recognize certain antecedent stimuli as reflexive MOs or mischaracterization of them as discriminative stimuli for problem behavior may stall attempts to reduce the problem behavior or may result in an over reliance on extinction (EXT). In most cases, alternative methods which do not reduce the aversiveness of the setting, such as DRA with extinction or FCT with extinction, have frequently been recommended.

56

29

• DRA involves reinforcing alternative (i.e., appropriate or desirable) behaviors. Simultaneously, reinforcement is typically withheld for occurrences of the problem behavior (EXT).

Kyle

• One problem with this may be that if problem behavior is occurring at a high rate, there may be little opportunity to reinforce alternative appropriate behaviors.

• FCT involves the replacement of problem behavior with behavior that produces the same reinforcer that has maintained the problem behavior (Durand and Carr, 1991). Simultaneously, reinforcement is typically withheld for occurrences of the problem behavior (EXT).

Peter Video – DRA & EXT)

• McGill claims that merely replacing problem behavior and not altering the EO may raise ethical concerns since FCT methods leave in place a “counterhabilitative environment” and may lead to only temporary changes in behavior since the circumstances evoking the behavior remain in place.

• In addition, FCT results in high rates of manding for removal of CMO-R (demands). If this response is not reinforced problem behavior usually occurs. If it is reinforced then very few learning opportunities are provided therefore rendering the procedure impractical.

57

• Notwithstanding these concerns, practitioners will frequently choose to implement either of the following procedures when instructional demands during discrete trial training evoke problem behavior:

1. DRA + EXT – maintain the demand after problem behavior occurs as a form of extinction and then reinforce when correct responding occurs.

2. FCT + EXT – teach the learner to request removal of the task requirement following delivery of a demand as an alternative to problem behavior.

• The decision to use of either one of these approaches, FCT or DRA, combined with EXT is typically based upon an assumption that: 1) the demands must be presented because of the importance of the skills being taught and/or 2) that the instructional setting (i.e., demands) cannot be made less aversive.

• Michael (2007) suggests the following instead:

“…one should not assume that the ultimate phases of the demand cannot be made less aversive. Increasing instructional effectiveness will result in less failure, more frequent reinforcement, and other general improvements in the demand situation to the point at which it may function as an opportunity for praise, edibles, and so forth, rather than a demand.” (p. 387)

58

30

• In other words, an analysis of the learning history of a child in which demands have come to function as reflexive MOs, such as the one presented earlier, may suggest interventions to abolish the value of escape as a reinforcer and, consequently, methods to abate problem behavior.

Abolishing the CMO-R in the Classroom

59

TEACHER,

DEMANDS, &

MATERIALS

USE TEACHING

PROCEDURES THAT

ENSURE:

•Teacher is paired with Sr+

•Higher value of Sr+

•Higher rate of Sr+

•Greater magnitude of Sr+

•More immediate Sr+

•Less effortful R

EVOKES

COOPERATIVE

BEHAVIOR THAT

PRODUCES

TEACHER

MEDIATED

POSITIVE

REINFORCERS

(RESPONSES

TO TEACHER

PRESENTED

INSTRUCTION

DEMANDS)

60

ABOLISHING THE CMO-R

TEACHING METHODS DESCRIPTION

PRESENT A STIMULUS

THAT ACTS AS AN

ABOLISHING OPERATION

. Initially correlate the teaching environment with highly valuable and high-density preferred stimuli .

Kelly Research

MIX & VARY TASKS

Present instructional demands in which the stimuli and response requirements vary from trial to trial.

Do not mass trial across one skill or one operant.

REDUCE LEARNER ERRORS Use errorless teaching methods that incorporate time delay prompting procedures. In other words, use

methods that insure high levels of correct responding.

INTERSPERSE EASY AND

HARD TASKS

Try to keep a ratio of about 80% known (i.e., easy) tasks to about 20% unknown (i.e., difficult) tasks.

FADE IN # OF DEMANDS

Use a VR schedule of reinforcement, but initially start by presenting a lower number of demands before

delivering reinforcement. Then, gradually increase the number of demands presented before delivering

reinforcement until reaching the desired VR schedule.

FADE IN EFFORT AND

DIFFICULTY OF

RESPONSES

While fading in number of demands, also gradually fade in the effort related to responding by slowly

increasing the difficulty of the demands being presented. In other words, start with demands that

require low effort responses and gradually increase to demands that require more effortful (i.e., more

difficult) responses.

EXTINCTION When problem behavior occurs, treat with extinction. For behaviors typically maintained by positive

reinforcement, do not deliver the reinforcer. For behaviors typically maintained by negative reinforcement,

do not allow escape to occur (i.e., maintain the demand).

IMMEDIATELY

DELIVER Sr+

Immediately deliver reinforcement for appropriate behaviors.

PACE INSTRUCTION

PROPERLY

Initially use the shortest inter-trial interval (ITI) possible. This should typically start off around 1 – 2

seconds.

.

31

• In the ABA literature, antecedent curricular revisions (Dunlap, G., Kern-Dunlap, L., Clarke, S., & Robbins, F.R., 1991; McGill, 1999) have been used to abolish the CMO-R of teacher instructions and demands by:

• Pairing and making available strong competing reinforcers (Call, Wacker, Ringdahl, Cooper-Brown, & Boeltric, 2004; Carr & Carlson, 1993; De Leon, et al., 2001; Fisher & Mazur, 1997; Harding, et al., 1999; Hoch, McComas, Thompson, & Paone, 2002; Kemp & Carr, 1995; Kennedy, 1994; Kennedy, Itkonen, & Lindquist, 1995; Lalli & Casey, 1996; Lalli, et al., 1999; Michael, 1993; Parrish, Cataldo, Kolko, Neef, & Egel, 1986; Piazza, et al., 1997; Russo, Cataldo, & Cushing, 1981)

• Mixing and varying the skills taught (i.e., mixed verbal behavior sessions) (Dunlap, 1984; Dunlap & Dunlap, 1987; Dunlap, Dyer, & Koegel, 1980; Dunlap & Koegel, 1980; McComas, Hoch, Paone, & El-Roy, 2000; Winterling, Dunlap, & O’Neil, 1987)

• Reducing learner errors (Altman, Hobbs, Roberts, & Haavik, 1980; Cameron, Ainsleigh, & Bird, 1992; Cameron, Luiselli, McGrath, & Carlton, 1992; Carr & Durand, 1985; Carr, Newsom, & Binkoff, 1980; Durand, 1990; Ebanks & Fisher, 2003; Etzel & LeBlanc, 1979; Heckaman, Alber, Hooper, & Heward, 1998; Horner & Day, 1991; Lancioni & Smeets, 1986; Reese, Howard, & Rosenberger, 1977; Sailor, Guess, Rutherford, & Baer, 1968; Sidman & Stoddard, 1966; Smith & Iwata, 1997; Sprague & Horner, 1992; Terrace, 1963a; Terrace, 1963b; Touchette & Howard, 1984; Weeks & Gaylord-Ross, 1981; Wolery, Ault, & Doyle, 1992; Wolery, Bailey, & Sugai, 1988).

61

• Interspersing high rates of “easy” demands with lower rates of “hard” demands (Carr, et al., 1980; Harchick & Putzier, 1990; Horner, Day, Sprague, O’Brien, & Healthfield, 1991; Mace & Belfiore, 1990; Mace, et al., 1988; Neef, Iwata, & Page, 1980; Singer, Singer, & Horner, 1987; Zarcone, Iwata, Hughes, & Vollmer, 1993)

• Gradually increasing the number of demands (Kennedy, 1994; Pace, Ivanic, & Jefferson, 1994; Pace, Iwata, Cowdery, Andree, & McIntyre, 1993; Piazza, Moses, & Fisher, 1996; Weld & Evans, 1990; Zarcone, Iwata, Smith, Mazaleski, & Lerman, 1994; Zaracone, et al., 1993)

• Gradually increasing the difficulty or effort of responses (Horner & Day, 1991; Iwata, Smith, & Michael, 2000; Richman, Wacker, and Winborn, 2001; Wacker, et al., 1990; Weld & Evans, 1990)

• Immediately reinforcing alternative behaviors (Horner and Day, 1991)

• Pacing the instruction properly (Cameron, Luiselli, McGrath, & Carlton, 1992; Carnine, 1976; Engelmann & Carnine, 1982; Dunlap, Dyer, & Koegel, 1983; Koegel, Dunlap, & Dyer, 1980; Roxburgh & Carbone, 2007; Tincani, Ernsbarger, Harrison, & Heward, 2005; Tincani & Crozier, 2008; Weeks & Gaylord-Ross, 1981; West & Sloane, 1986; Zanolli, Daggett, & Pestine, 1995)

62

32

• For a review of the literature on the application of the motivating operation to the reduction of problem behavior and discussion of the methods outlined in the section above see Carbone, Morgenstern, Zecchin-Tirri, & Kolberg, 2010; Langthorne, McGill & Oliver, 2014; McGill, 1999; Smith & Iwata, 1997; and Wilder & Carr, 1998.

• The following table summarizes these teaching procedures and provide a self-assessment tool that can be used to determine what antecedent curricular revisions you need to make to your current instructional methods in order to more effectively abolish the CMO-R and abate the problem behavior exhibited by your learners.

63

64

33

65

How To Abolish The CMO-R

• While abolishing the CMO-R appears to be an effective method of reducing problem

behavior during instruction, in practical application infrequent use is made of this independent variable.

• Here are several examples of how to apply these antecedent manipulations to abolish the CMO-R, thereby increasing the effectiveness of instruction:

• The first situation is one where all stimuli associated with an instructional environment initially acted as reflexive MOs. Here the CMO-R was abolished through presentation of a strong abolishing operation. Note the difference in learner cooperation.

Jack in High Chair Jack Part 1

Jack Abolishing the CMO-R # 2

• This example shows a situation where the teaching environment and teacher instructions and demands acted as reflexive MOs. We will then see the same learner a few weeks later when the teaching procedures were changed to include methods that abolished the reflexive MOs. Note the differences in student and teacher responding.

Kyle Case Study- Revised July 2013

• Here are videos of a teacher abolishing the CMO-R during a discrete trial training session with uncooperative learners. Take note of how prior to these curricular revisions escape from the instructional situation was the most valuable reinforcer. Following the curricular revisions, however, the learners quickly returns to the instructional environment without problem behavior.

Brittany

David R. Abolishing CMO-R Case Study

ACTIVITY Virtual Consultant

Questions On Next Slide (Josh and Vince)

Josh Picture

• Finally, here are several different learners of varying skill levels whose instructors are using procedures that reflect manipulation of the variables that abolished the aversive nature of the teaching setting. Note in particular the use of errorless instruction which reduces the frequency of errors, intersperse of high rate of mastered items, the mixing of all the skills being taught (mixed VB), the relatively brisk pace of the instruction, the high rate of reinforcement, etc.

MVB Videos

66

34

Virtual Consultant Questions

67

68

35

69

70

36

71

72

Behavior Modification. (2013) May; 37(3): 298-323.

37

73

74

38

75

References

Altman, K., Hobbs, S., Roberts, M., & Haavik, S. (1980). Control of disruptive behavior by manipulation of reinforcement density and item difficulty subsequent to errors. Applied Research in Mental Retardation, 1, 193-208.

Anderson, M. S. (2009). Use of empirically-based reading interventions to address the academic skill deficits and escape-maintained target behaviors exhibited by elementary school students. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 69, 2597.

Call, N. A., Wacker, D. P., Ringdahl, J. E., Cooper-Brown, L. J., & Boeltric, E. W. (2004). An assessment of antecedent events influencing noncompliance in an outpatient clinic. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37, 145-158.

Cameron, M. J., Ainsleigh, S. A., & Bird, F. L. (1992). The acquisition of stimulus control of compliance and participation during an ADL routine. Behavioral Residential Treatment, 7, 327-340.

Cameron, M. J., Luiselli, J. K., McGrath, M., & Carlton, R. (1992). Stimulus control analysis and treatment of noncompliant behavior. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 4, 141-150.

Carbone, V.J., Morgenstern, B., Zecchin-Tirri, G., & Kolberg, L. (2010). The role

of the

reflexive conditioned motivating operation (CMO-R) during discrete trial

instruction of children with autism. Focus on Autism and Other

Developmental Disabilities, 25, 110-124.

Carnine, D. W. (1976). Effects of two teacher presentation rates on off-task behavior, answering correctly and participation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 9, 199-206.

Carr, E. G., & Carlson, J. I. (1993). Reduction of severe behavior problems in the community using a multicomponent treatment approach. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 157-172.

Carr, E. G., & Durand, V. M. (1985). Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 111-126.

Carr, E. G., Newsome, C. D., & Binkoff, J. A. (1980). Escape as a factor in the aggressive behavior of two retarded children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 101-117.

DeLeon, I. G., Fisher, W. F., Rodriguez-Catter, V., Maglieri, K., Herman, K., & Marhefka, J. (2001). Examination of relative reinforcement effects of stimuli identified through pretreatment and daily brief preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34, 463-473.

Dunlap, G. (1984). The influence of task variation and maintenance tasks in the learning and affect of autistic children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 37, 41-64.

Dunlap, L. K, & Dunlap, G. (1987). Using task variation to motivate handicap students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 19, 16-19.

Dunlap, G., Dyer, K., & Koegel, R. L. (1980). Motivating autistic children through stimulus variation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 619-627.

76

39

Dunlap, G., Dyer, K., & Koegel, R. L. (1983). Autistic self-stimulation and intertrial interval. Journal of Mental Deficiency, 88, 194-202.

Dunlap, G., Kern-Dunlap, L., Clarke, S., & Robbins, F. R. (1991). Functional assessment, curricular revisions and severe problem behavior problems. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 387 – 397.

Dunlap, G., & Koegel, R. L. (1980). Motivating autistic children through stimulus variation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 619-627.

Durand, V. M. (1990). Severe behavior problems: A functional communication instruction approach. New York: Guildord.

Durand, V. M., & Carr, E. G. (1991). Functional communication training to reduce challenging behavior: Maintenance and application in new settings. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 251 – 264.

Ebanks, M. E., & Fisher, W. W. (2003). Altering the timing of academic prompts to treat destructive behavior maintained by escape. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 355-359.

Engelmann, S., & Carnine, D. (1982). Theory of instruction: Principles and application. NY: Irvington Publishers.

Etzel, B. C., & LeBlanc, J. M. (1979). The simplest treatment alternative: The law of parsimony applied to choosing appropriate instructional control and errorless-learning procedures for the difficult-to-teach child. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 9, 361-382.

77

Fisher, W. W., & Mazure, J. E. (1997). Basic and applied research on choice responding. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 387-410.

Harchik, A. G., & Putzier, V. A. (1990). The use of high-probability requests to increase compliance with instructions to take medication. The Journal of the Associatino for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 15, 40-43.

Harding, J. W., Wacker, D. P., Berg, W. K., Cooper, L. J., Asmus, J., Mlela, K., et al. (1999). An analysis of choice making in the assessment of young children with severe behavior problems. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 63-82.

Heckaman, K. A., Alber, S. R., Hooper, S., & Heward, W. L. (1998). A comparison of least-to-most prompts and progressive time delay on the disruptive behavior of students with autism. Journal of Behavior Education, 8, 171-201.

Hoch, H., McComas, J. J., Thompson, A. L., & Paone, D. (2002). Concurrent reinforcement schedules: Behavior change and maintenance without extinction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 155-169.

Horner, R. H., & Day, H. M. (1991). The effects of response efficiency in functionally equivalent competing behaviors. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 719-732.

Horner, R. H., Day, M., Sprague, J., O’Brien, M., & Heathfield, L. (1991). Interspersed requests: A non-aversive procedure for reducing aggression and self-injury during instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 265-278.

78

40

79

Iwata, B. A., Smith, R. G., & Michael, J. (2000). Current research on the influence of establishing operations on behavior in applied settings. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33, 401-410.

Johnson-Gros, K. N. (2006). Evaluation of antecedent and consequent interventions in mathematics. Dissertation Abstracts International Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 67, 2820.

Kemp, D. C., & Carr, E. G. (1995). Reduction of severe problem behavior in community employment using a hypothesis-driven multicomponent treatment approach. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 20, 229-247.

Kennedy, C. H. (1994). Manipulating antecedent conditions to alter the stimulus control of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 161-170.

Kennedy, C. H., Itkonen, T., & Lindquist, K. (1995). Comparing interspersed requests and social comments as antecedent for increasing student compliance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 97-98.

Koegel, R. L., Dunlap, G., & Dyer, K. (1980). Intertrial interval duration and learning in autistic children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 91-99.

Koegel, L. K., Koegel, R. L., Shoshan, Y., & McNerney, E. (1999). Pivotal response intervention II: Preliminary long term outcome data. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24, 186 – 198.

Koegel, R. L., Carter, C. M., & Koegel, L. K. (1998). Setting events to improve parent-teacher coordination with autism. In J. K. Luiselli & M. J. Camerson (Eds.), Antecedent control (pp. 167 – 187). Baltimore: Paul H. Brooks Publishing.

Koegel, R. L., Koegel, L. K., Frea, W. D., & Smith, A. E. (1995). Emerging interventions for children with autism: Longitudinal and lifestyle implications. In R. L. Koegel & L. K. Koegel (Eds.), Teaching children with autism: Strategies for initiating positive interactions and improving learning opportunities (pp. 1 – 15). Baltimore: Paul H. Brooks Publishing.

Kubina, R. M., Jr., Morrison, R., & Lee, D. L. (2002). Benefits of adding precision teaching to behavioral interventions for students with autism. Behavioral Interventions, 17, 233-246.

Lalli, J. S., & Casey, S. D., (1996). Treatment of multiply controlled problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 391-395.

Lalli, J. S., Vollmer, T. R., Progar, P. R., Wright, C., Borrero, J., Tocco, K., et al. (1999). Competition between positive and negative reinforcement schedules in the treatment of escape-maintained problem behaviors. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 285-296.

Lancioni, G. E., & Smeets, P. M. (1986). Procedures and parameters of errorless discrimination training with developmentally impaired individuals. In N. R. Ellis & N. W. Bray (Eds.),International review of research in mental retardation (Vol. 14, pp. 135–164). New York: Academic Press.

Laraway, S., Snycerski, S., Michael, J., & Poling, A. (2003). Motivating operations and terms to describe them: Some further refinements. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 407 – 414.

80

41

Lovaas, O. I. (with Ackerman, A.B., Alexander, D., Firestone, P., Perkins, M., & Young), (1981). Teaching developmentally disabled children: The ME book. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

Lovaas, O. I. (2003). Teaching individuals with developmental delays: Basic intervention techniques. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

Mace, F. C., & Belfiore, P. (1990). Behavioral momentum in the treatment of escape-motivated stereotypy. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 507-514.

Mace, F. C., Hock, M. L., Lalli, J. S., West, B. J., Belfiore, P., Pinter, E., & Brown, D. K. (1988). Behavioral momentum in the treatment of noncompliance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 123-141.

McComas, J., Hoch, H., Paone, D., & El-Roy, D. (2000). Escape behavior during academic tasks: A preliminary analysis of idiosyncratic establishing operations. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33, 479-493.

McDowell, C., & Keenan, M. (2001). Developing fluency and endurance in a child diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34, 345-348.

McGill, P. (1999). Establishing operations: Implications for the assessment, treatment and prevention of problem behaviors. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 389 – 418.

Michael, J. (1993). Establishing operations. The Behavior Analyst, 16, 191 – 206.

81

Michael, J. (2000). Implications and refinements of the establishing operation concept. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33, 401 – 410.

Michael, J. (2007). Motivating operations. In J. O. Cooper, T. E. Heron, & W. L. Heward (Eds.), Applied Behavior Analysis (2nd ed., pp. 374 – 391). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Neef, N. A., Iwata, B. A., & Page, T. (1980). The effects of interspersal instruction versus high density reinforcement on spelling acquisition and retention. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 153-158.

Pace, G. M., Iwata, B. A., Cowdery, G. E., Andree, P. J., & McIntyre, T. (1993). Stimulus (instructional) demand fading during extinction of self-injurious escape behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 205-212.

Pace, G.M., Ivancic, M.T., & Jefferson, G. (1994). Stimulus fading as treatment for obscenity in a brain injured adult. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 301-305.

Parrish, J. P., Cataldo, M. F., Kolko, D. J., Neef, N. A., & Egel, A. L. (1986). Experimental analysis of response covariation among compliant and inappropriate behaviors. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 19, 241-254.

Piazza, C. C., Fisher, W. W., Hanley, G. P., Remick, M. L., Contrucci, S. A., & Aitken, T. L. (1997). The use of positive and negative reinforcement in the treatment of escape-maintained destructive behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 279-298.

82

42

83

Piazza, C. C., Moses, D. R., & Fisher, W. W. (1996). Differential reinforcement of

alternative behavior and demand ffading in the treatment of escape maintained

destructive behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 569-572.

Reese, E. P., Howard, J. S., & Rosenberger, P. B. (1977). Behavioral procedures for

assessing visual capacities in nonverbal subjects. In B. C. Etzel, J. M. LeBlanc, &

D. M. Baer (Eds.) New developments in behavioral research: Theory, method, and

application. In honor of Sidney W. Bijou. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.

Richman, D. M., Wacker, D. P., & Winborn, L. (2001). Response efficiency during

functional communication instruction: Effects of effort on response allocation.

Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34, 73-76.

Roxburgh, C., & Carbone, V. J. (2007). The effects of varying teacher presentation

rate on responding during discrete trial instruction of two children with autism.

Manuscript in preparation.

Russo, D. C., Cataldo, M. F., & Cushing, P. J. (1981). Compliance instruction and

behavioral co variation in the treatment of multiple behavior problems. Journal of

Applied Behavior Analysis, 14, 209-222.

Sailor, W., Guess, D., Rutherford, G., & Baer, D. M. (1968). Control of tantrum

behavior by operant techniques during extinction of self-injurious escape behavior.

Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 237-243.

Sidman, M., & Stoddard, L. T. (1966). Programming perception and learning for retarded children. In N. R. Ellis (Ed), International review of research in mental retardation (Vol. 2). New York: Academic Press (pp. 151–208).

Singer, G., Singer, J., & Horner, R. (1987). Using pre-task requests to increase the probability of compliance for students with severe disabilities. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 12, 287-291.

Smith, R., & Iwata, B. (1997). Antecedent influences on behavior disorders. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 267 – 278.\

Smith, T. (2001) Discrete trial training in the treatment of autism. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities Summer 2001 16: 86-92.

Sprague, J. R., & Horner, R. H. (1992). Co-variation within functional response classes: Implications for treatment of severe problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 735-745.

Terrace, H. S. (1963a). Discrimination learning with and without errors. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,6, 1–27.

Terrace, H. S. (1963b). Errorless transfer of a discrimination across two continua. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,6, 223–232.

Tincani, M., Ernsbarger, S., Harrison, T. J., & Heward, W. L. (2005). Effects of two instructional paces on pre-k children’s participation rate, accuracy, and off task behavior in the language for learning program? Journal of Direct Instruction, 5, 97-109.

84

43

Tincani, M., & Crozier, S. (2008) Comparing brief and extended wait-time during small group instruction for children with challenging behavior, Journal of Behavioural Education, 17, 79-92

Touchette, P. E., & Howard, J. (1984). Errorless learning: Reinforcement contingencies and stimulus control transfer in delayed prompting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 175-181.

Wacker, D., Steege, M., Northup, J., Reimers, T., Berg, W., & Sasso, G. (1990). Use of functional analysis and acceptability measures to assess and treat severe behavior problems: An outpatient clinic model. In A. C. Repp & N. N. Singh (Eds.), Perspectives on the use of non-aversive and aversive interventions for persons with developmental disabilities (pp. 349-359). Sycamore, IL: Sycamore.

Weeks, M., & Gaylord-Ross, R. (1981). Task difficulty and aberrant behavior in severely handicapped students. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14, 449-463.

Weld, E. M., & Evans, I. M. (1990). Effects of part versus whole instructional strategies on skill acquisition and excess behavior. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 4, 377-386.

West, R., & Sloane, H. (1986). Teacher presentation rate and point delivery rate: Effect on classroom disruption, performance accuracy, and response rate. Behavior Modification, 10, 267-286.

Wilder, D. A., & Carr, J. E. (1998). Recent advances in the modification of establishing operations to reduce aberrant behavior. Behavioral Interventions, 13, 43 – 59.

85

Winterling, V., Dunlap, G., & O’Neill, R. E. (1987). The influence of task variation on the aberrant behavior of autistic students. Education and Treatment of Children, 10, 105-119.

Wolery, M., Ault, M. J., & Doyle, P. M. (1992). Teaching students with moderate to severe disabilities: Use of response prompting strategies. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Wolery, M., Bailey, D. B., & Sugai, G. M. (1988). Effective teaching: Principles and procedures of applied behavior analysis with exceptional students. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Zanolli, K., Daggett, J., & Pestine, H. (1995). The influence of the pace of teacher attention on preschool children's engagement. Behavior Modification, 19, 339-356.

Zarcone, J. R., Iwata, B. A., Hughes, C. E., & Vollmer, T. R. (1993). Momentum versus extinction effects in the treatment of self-injurious escape behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 135-136.

Zarcone, J. R., Iwata, B. A., Smith, R. G., Mazaleski, J. L., & Lerman, D. C. (1994). Reemergence and extinction of self-injurious escape behavior during stimulus (instructional) fading. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 307-316.

Zarcone, J. R., Iwata, B. A., Vollmer, T. R., Jagtiani, S., Smith, R. G., & Mazaleski, J. L. (1993). Extinction of self-injurious escape behavior with and without instructional fading. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 353-360.

86

44

The Role of the Conditioned Transitive Motivating Operation (CMO-T) in Teaching Complex Language

and Social Behavior to Children with Autism

87

88

CEO-T:Definition & animal example

CEO-T: An environmental variable related to the relation between another stimulus and some form of rfmt, and thus establishes the reinforcing effectiveness of the other stimulus, evokes all behavior that has produced that stimulus.

Examples: UEOs function as CEO-Ts for stimuli that are Srs because of their relation to the relevant SR.

For example: When deprived of food and food is only available by opening a can, then a can opener will be conditioned as a reinforcer and all behavior that has produced can openers in the past will be evoked.

What is the CEO-T- Food Deprivation and the context (food is only available from a can and no can opener is available)

45

89

In the case of food deprived pigeon, Tone is off- key pecks produce no reinforcement. Treadle press turns on tone so that key pecks now produce food reinforcement for 3 seconds and then back to Tone off state.

ACTIVITY # 7

tone off rfmt off

tone ON rfmt off

tone ON rfmt ON

R1 R2

3 sec R1 = treadle press, R2 = key peck, rfmt = 3" grain available

Skinner Video CMO-T Explain

90

Human CEO-T:Flashlight example

The rfing effectiveness of many human Srs is dependent on other stimulus conditions because of a learning history. Thus conditioned reinforcing effectiveness is dependent on a context. When the context is not appropriate the S may be available, but is not accessed because it is not effective as rfmt in that context. A change to an appropriate context will evoke behavior that has been followed by that S. The occurrence of the behavior is not related to the availability of the S, but to its value.

46

91

Flashlight ACTIVITY

Human CEO-T: A sudden power outage after dark in most homes immediately evokes some

action on the part of the dwellers. Answer these questions

• What is the CEO-T:

• Conditioned reinforcer established by CEO-T:

• Behavior evoked:

• SD for Behavior:

• Ultimate Reinforcer:

• Explain why the CEO-T you have identified is not an Sd for the behavior (discuss how only the MO and not the Sd conditions are met):

92

Screwdriver ACTIVITY

Human CEO-T: Slotted Screwdriver Exercise Consider a workman disassembling a piece of equipment, with an assistant

providing tools as they are requested. The workman encounters a slotted screw and requests a screwdriver.

Answer these questions

• What is the CEO-T: • Conditioned reinforcer established by CEO-T: • Behavior evoked: • SD for Behavior: • Ultimate Reinforcer: • Explain why the CEO-T you have identified is not an Sd for the behavior

(discuss how only the MO and not the Sd conditions are met):

47

93

Danger ACTIVITY

Human CEO-T: The danger stimulus Exercise A night security guard patrolling an area hears a suspicious sound. He activates his mobile phone which signals another guard, who then activates his own phone and asks if help is needed (the rfmt for the first guard's response). Is the suspicious sound an Sd or CEO-T and why?

Answer these questions

• What is the CEO-T: • Conditioned reinforcer established by CEO-T: • Behavior evoked: • SD for Behavior: • Ultimate Reinforcer: • Explain why the CEO-T you have identified is not an Sd for the behavior

(discuss how only the MO and not the Sd conditions are met):

• The transitive conditioned motivating operation (CMO-T) appears to be most relevant to the conditioning of stimuli as reinforcers (Sundberg, 2005) and may play an important role in teaching language and other skills to children with autism who fail to acquire these repertoires through typical means.

• Michael originally referred to this conditioning effect by another name;

blocked access or interrupted chain effect. In other words, if some item is highly valuable at this moment but some additional action, item or even information is necessary to produce the valued item then any of the additional stimuli would now act as reinforcers for any behavior that would produce them.

• In other words, CMO-Ts convert neutral stimuli to conditionally conditioned

reinforcers and therefore evoke all responses that have in past been strengthened by their delivery.

94

48

Conditioned Transitive Motivating Operation

CMO-T

When An Item or Activity or Action Would Act as a Reinforcer

AND

Some Other Item or Activity or Action is Required To Obtain the Reinforcer

AND

Access to the other item, activity or action is Blocked or Interrupted

Then

The Other Item, Activity or Action is Momentarily Conditioned as a Reinforcer

AND

All Behavior That Has Previously Been Strengthened with That Reinforcer Will be Evoked

95

CMO-T Example

CMO-T

When Driving My Car Becomes Valuable to Me

AND

I Need My Car Keys

AND

I Can’t Find My Keys

Then

Information About the Location of My Keys is Momentarily Conditioned as a Reinforcer

AND

All Behavior That Has Produced Information About Location is Evoked “I ask, Where are my keys?

96

49

• Another example, if a child has motivation for cereal, and is given a bowl of cereal without a spoon, the motivation for the cereal “but without a spoon” momentarily alters the value of the spoon as a reinforcer and therefore evokes any behavior that has produced a spoon in the past, such as searching or asking another person.

• The spoon has become a conditioned conditional reinforcer because consuming

the cereal is conditional upon obtaining a spoon. Once the spoon is delivered, the child then is able to consume the food which has all along had value but was unobtainable.

• By contriving this type of situation a teacher could condition items or activities

in the environment as reinforcers and use these now established reinforcers to teach language disordered persons to mand for them.

• In his book Verbal Behavior Skinner defined the mand as “a verbal operant in

which the response is reinforced by a characteristic consequence and is therefore under the functional control of relevant conditions of deprivation or satiation.” (1957,pp.33-36).

97

• Since the mand or request response plays an important role in the language training of persons with autism (Sundberg & Michael, 2001) a teacher’s knowledge of how to make use of the transitive establishing operation as an independent variable may be critical.

• Shafer (1994) points out that the transitive EO can be used to establish the reinforcing potential of many previously neutral items without the disadvantages associated with unconditioned establishing operations.

• Moreover, by using the transitive EO to condition items as reinforcers in a chain of responses, language disordered children can be taught to mand for items primarily under the control of the EO and therefore free their responses from the additional control exerted by the presence of the item.

• Several studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of increasing the mand repertoire of persons with developmental disabilities through the use of the transitive motivating operation. (Albert, Carbone, Murray, Hagerty & Sweeney-Kerwin, 2012; Arntzen & Almas, 2002; Betz et al., 2010; Carroll & Hesse, 1987; Endicott & Higbee, 2007; Hall & Sundberg, 1987;Lechago et al., 2010; Marion, Martin, Yu, & Buhler, 2011; Marion, Martin, Yu, Buhler, & Kerr, in press; Marion, Martin, Yu, Buhler, Kerr & Claets, 2012; Rosales & Rehfeldt, 2007; Roy-Wsiaki, Marion, Martin, & Yu, 2010; Shillingsburg & Valentino, 2011; Sidener et al., 2010; Sigafoos, Doss, & Reichle, 1989; Sundberg et al., 2002; Williams et al., 2000; Ziomek & Rehfeldt, 2008).

98

50

• Hall and Sundberg (1987) were among the first experimenters to

successfully demonstrate the value of using an interrupted chain (CMO-T) to teach persons with developmental disabilities to mand for missing items necessary to complete chains related to making coffee, soup and purchasing items from vending machines.

• Blocking items necessary to complete the chains of making coffee and soup

allowed the experimenters to contrive motivation for items which were previously motivationally neutral, where obtaining the missing items served as a conditioned reinforcer since it led to consumption of the terminal reinforcer, the coffee and the soup.

99

• By contriving the CMO-T in a procedure such as this, it ensures that the MO is in effect at the time of training and eliminates control exerted by discriminative stimuli.

• This study demonstrated that mands for missing items could be taught by

manipulating the CMO-T. • Since the findings of Hall and Sundberg (1987), experimenters have

extended the use of the interrupted chain procedure to teach persons with developmental disabilities to mand for missing items.

• In the next page is a diagram describing the application of the CMO-T

within language training programs for children with autism.

100

51

101

MO FOR

WATER

EXPOSURE TO THE

VALUE OF CUP,

OPENING THE

BOTTLE AND

POURING WHEN

CONSUMING

WATER

DRINKING

WATER

EXPOSURE

MO FOR

WATER

BLOCKED ACCESS

TO CUP, OPEN

BOTTLE &

POURING

EVOKES MANDS

FOR “CUP, OPEN

WATER & POUR”

SUBSEQUENTLY,

MANDS EVOKED

Declan

APPLICATION OF THE CMO-T

CMO-T

• In a recent study by Albert, Carbone, Murray, Sweeney-Kerwin (2012) that replicated and extended Hall and Sundberg (1997) three children with autism were taught to mand for missing items by contriving the CMO-T in the context of an interrupted chain.

102

52

103

104

53

The response chains for Vincent included: • Painting a picture - Objects included a smock, paper, clip, paintbrush,

water, paint and an easel. The actions consisted of putting on the smock, handing the clip to the instructor, picking up the paintbrush, putting the paintbrush in the water, putting the paintbrush in the paint and applying the paintbrush to the paper and then repeating some of these actions several times during the activity.

• Making an art project - Objects included paper cut into shapes, glue and

glitter. The actions consisted of picking up the paper shapes, putting glue on each shape, arranging the shapes into a picture, putting glue on the arranged shapes and sprinkling glitter onto the shapes.

• Making a sandwich - Objects in this response chain included bread, a

toaster, a plate, peanut butter and a knife. The actions consisted of opening the bag of bread, putting the bread into the toaster, pushing the toaster down, taking the bread out of the toaster, putting the bread on the plate, opening the peanut butter, putting the peanut butter on the knife, spreading the peanut butter on the bread and eating the sandwich.

105

106

The response chains for Naryan included:

Listening to music - Objects included a portable CD player, a CD, and headphones. The actions consisted of opening the CD player, putting the CD in the CD player, putting the headphones on, and pressing the play button.

Science project - Objects included a plastic container, bottle of water,

2 bottles of food coloring, and a spoon. The actions consisted of pouring the water into the container, dropping the food coloring into the container, picking up the spoon, mixing the liquid with a spoon.

Painting a picture - Objects included a smock, paper, paintbrush,

paint, water, paint and an easel. The actions consisted of putting on the smock, picking up the piece of paper, picking up the paintbrush, dipping the paintbrush in the water, putting the paintbrush in the paint and applying the paintbrush to the paper and then repeating some of these actions several times during the activity.

54

The response chains for Cadia included: • Making juice - Objects included a cup, powder to make juice, spoon, 2 ice

cubes and a measuring cup. The actions consisted of scooping powder into cup, pouring water in the cup, and putting the ice cubes into the cup.

• Making an art project - Objects included paper, 3 crayons, glue stick, and

glitter. The actions consisted of coloring the picture, rubbing the glue on the paper, and sprinkling glitter on the paper.

• Painting a picture - Objects included a smock, paper, clip, paintbrush, water, paint and an easel. The actions consisted of putting on the smock, picking up the piece of paper, handing the clip to the instructor, picking up the paintbrush, dipping the paintbrush in the water, putting the paintbrush in the paint and applying the paintbrush to the paper and then repeating some of these actions several times during the activity.

107

Baseline Prompt Fade

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19

NR

P

EO

NR

P

EO

EO

P

NR

Sessions

“Do a

n a

rt p

roje

ct”

Occ

urr

ence

of

Res

pon

se

“Pai

nt a

pic

ture

”

Occ

urr

ence

of

Res

pon

se

“Mak

e a

san

dw

ich

”

Occ

urr

ence

of

Res

pon

se

Victor

EO = EO Controlled

P = Vocally Prompted

NR = No Response

Figure 1. The occurrence of mands for missing items recorded by controlling variable (MO, prompted,

no response) across baseline and treatment conditions.

Glitter

Easel

Toaster

108

55

Food Coloring

CD Player

Baseline Prompt Fade

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Easel

EO

EO

P

P

NR

EO

P

NR

NR

“Lis

ten

to M

usi

c”

Occ

urr

ence

of

Res

pon

se

“Do a

Sci

ence

Pro

ject

”

Occ

urr

ence

of

Res

pon

se

“Pai

nt a

Pic

ture

”

Occ

urr

ence

of

Res

pon

se

Sessions

Nathaniel

Figure 2. The occurrence of mands for missing items recorded by controlling variable (MO, prompted,

no response) across baseline and treatment conditions.

EO = EO Controlled

P = Vocally Prompted

NR = No Response

109

Baseline Prompt Fade

Clip

Glitter

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Measuring Cups

EO

EO

EO

P

P

P

NR

NR

NR

“Pai

nt a

Pic

ture

”

Occ

urr

ence

of

Res

pon

se

“Do a

n A

rt P

roje

ct”

Occ

urr

ence

of

Res

pon

se

“Let

’s M

ake

Som

e

Juic

e”

Occ

urr

ence

of

Res

pon

se

EO = EO Controlled

P = Vocally Prompted

NR = No Response

Figure 3. The occurrence of mands for missing items recorded by controlling variable

(MO, prompted, no response) across baseline and treatment conditions.

Carina

Andre

110

56

Andrew:

Drawing a Picture

111

112

Andre Manding

57

Manding for Information

• Similar studies have been conducted to condition verbal information as a reinforcer by using the CMO-T as an independent variable in increasing the mand repertoire in children with autism (Williams, Donely, & Keller, 2000; Sundberg, Loeb, Hale, & Eigenheer 2002, Endicott & Higbee 2007).

• Sundberg, Loeb, Hale, and Eigenheer (2002) contrived CMO-T to teach mands for

information to two children with autism.

• The first portion of the experiment involved giving the participants desired and undesired items in a container.

• After being taught to obtain a variety of reinforcers from the containers, the participants were later given the same containers without the reinforcing items inside.

• This procedure resulted in conditioning the missing items as reinforcers so that their absence would evoke responses that might produce the missing items, e.g. searching or information.

• To teach a mand for information instead of searching behavior the therapist immediately prompt the response “where” and reinforces with information that leads to obtaining the desirable items.

113

• Once the “where” response was occurring reliably a second experiment was conducted to teach the response “who”.

• The second experiment involved contriving another MO by informing the participants that the item was given to a teacher, increasing the value of obtaining information about the teacher’s name, asking “who” as a reinforcer.

114

58

115

Manding For Information Teaching Procedures

• Skinner (1957) states, “A question is a mand which specifies verbal action.” • In other words, there are stimulus conditions under which a verbal response

(information) has been established as a reinforcer and therefore evokes a question (mand), the answer (verbal action) to which in the past has produced some form of reinforcement (e.g. more effective action by the asker).

• For example, if my hat becomes valuable as a piece of warm clothing (S-1) AND I discover that it is not to be found in its usual place (S-2), then information about its location will be established as a reinforcer and may therefore evoke the response “where is my hat?” since that response has previously produced information that directed me to my hat when it had reinforcing value.

• Sundberg, et al. (2002) demonstrated that mands for information regarding location (where) and specific information about a person (who) could be taught to children with autism by manipulating transitive establishing operations (CMO-T).

116

General Teaching Procedures:

• Contrive motivation for information (e.g., hide an item that the learner needs, interrupt a pre-established routine).

• As soon as the learner declares motivation for “who,” “what,” “which,” “where,” “why,” “how,” or “can/does/do/will” information (e.g., looks for the missing item), prompt the mand by saying, “Ask me, ‘mand for information?’” (e.g., “Ask me, ‘Where is the pencil?’”)

• Immediately following the learner echoing the prompted mand, transfer stimulus control by recontriving motivation and implementing a 3-second time delay to wait for the learner to repeat the mand for information.

• After the learner repeats the mand for information, reinforce the mand by delivering the INFORMATION requested.

59

117

Teach the following: What: when the names of people, places, things, and actions would be reinforcing information Where: when location would be reinforcing information Who: when the name of a specific person would be reinforcing Whose: when the name of a person who possesses something would be reinforcing When: when information regarding time would be reinforcing Why: when information for the causes of events would be reinforcing How: when information for instructions and the functions of things would be reinforcing Adapted from Sundberg (2002)

118

• Let’s now look at a video example of manding for information. Notice how the instructor must prompt some forms of the appropriate mands for information (questions) when the MO is strong but when the learner does not have the form of the response in his repertoire.

• As you watch the video, follow along with the diagram below which specifies the controlling nature of each stimulus in the chain of responses.

60

119

Chain Of Mands For Information Diego Video

Manding Why?

(S-1) Watching the video is effective as reinforcement. (S-2) Kim says to Diego, “Press stop.”

ESTABLISHES

An explanation of her request as a reinforcer.

EVOKES Diego to say, “WHY?”

Reinforcer: Kim says, “Because we are going to go play with some toys.”

Manding Where? (S-3) “Because we are going to play with some toys.”

ESTABLISHES

Additional information about the location of the toys as a reinforcer.

EVOKES Diego to say, “WHERE?”

Reinforcer: Kim says, “Over at the other table.”

120

Manding How?

(S-4) Placing parts on Mr. Potato Head is effective as reinforcement.

(S-5) Diego tries, but can not put the backpack on Mr. Potato Head.

ESTABLISHES Instructions about how to do it as a reinforcer.

EVOKES

Diego to say with an echoic prompt, “HOW DO I DO IT?” Reinforcer: Kim tells him how to do it.

Manding Where?

(S-6) The nose on Mr. Potato Head is effective as reinforcement. (S-7) Diego cannot find it.

ESTABLISHES

Information about its location as a reinforcer.

EVOKES Diego to say, “WHERE IS IT?”

Reinforcer: Kim says, “On the shelf.”

61

121

Manding Which? (S-8) Kim says “On the shelf.”

(S-9) There are several shelves.

ESTABLISHES Information regarding a specific shelf as a reinforcer.

EVOKES

Diego to say, “WHICH ONE?” Reinforcer: Kim says, “The one over there.”

Manding Where? (S-10) Mr. Potato Head eyes are effective as reinforcement.

(S-11) Diego cannot find them.

ESTABLISHES Information about the location of the eyes as a reinforcer.

EVOKES

Diego to say, “WHERE ARE THE EYES?” Reinforcer: Kim says, “I don’t know but I know someone who does.”

122

Manding Who?

(S-12) Kim’s information about someone who knows.

ESTABLISHES

Information about a specific person as a reinforcer.

EVOKES

Diego to say with an echoic prompt, “Who?”

Reinforcer: Kim says, “Emily.”

DIEGO VIDEO

62

123

• In this second video, Tyler’s repertoire of manding for information is now quite strong and therefore requires no prompting. The appropriately contrived MOs evoke all of the mands.

• Let’s watch this video of Tyler and note how Jimmy contrives the motivation that increases the value of information as a reinforcer for Tyler.

TYLER VIDEO

Kellen Manding Information

124

Sample Lesson Plan TYLER

Contrived MO (MOTIVATION)

What Now Becomes a Reinforcer?

What should you teach the learner to

say?

Teacher’s Response

(Reinforcer)

Data Recording of Prompted and Unprompted

Guess what?

Info about what they are going to

do

What?

I want to play with something…

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

I want to play with something…

Info about what Jimmy wants to

play with

What do you want to play with?

I want to play with the trains

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

(Goes to the trains) Not right now though…

Info about when Tyler can play with the trains

When? After you give me a high

five

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

We’ve got to turn it on… Info about how to

turn it on How do we turn it on?

We have to press that button

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

(Button doesn’t work) I don’t know how to turn

it on, but I know someone who does

Info about who knows how to

turn on the trains

Who? (Knows how to turn

on train) Danielle

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

Danielle knows how to turn it on

Info from Danielle about how to turn on

the trains

How do we turn it on? You press the lever Prompted

Spontaneous Novel

63

125

Sample Lesson Plan

TYLER Contrived MO (MOTIVATION)

What Now Becomes a Reinforcer?

What should you teach the learner to

say?

Teacher’s Response

(Reinforcer)

Data Recording of Prompted and Unprompted

Accidentally turn the train off

Info about why Jimmy turned the

train off

Why did you do that?

It was an accident, but I want to play another

game

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

I want to play another game…

Info about what game the teacher

wants to play

What game? Perfection

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

Lets go get Perfection

Info about where

Perfection is

Where’s Perfection?

I don’t know where it is, but I know someone who

knows

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

I know someone who knows where Perfection is

Info about who knows

where Perfection is

Who? (Knows where Perfection is)

Kelly

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

Kelly knows where Perfection is

Info about where

Perfection is

Where’s Perfection? In the teacher’s room

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

126

Sample Lesson Plan

TYLER Contrived MO (MOTIVATION)

What Now Becomes a Reinforcer?

What should you teach the learner

to say?

Teacher’s Response

(Reinforcer)

Data Recording of Prompted and Unprompted

The closet is locked and the key is missing

Info about where the

key is

Where’s the key?

I don’t know where it is, but I know someone who

knows

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

I know someone who knows where the key

is…

Info about who knows where the

key is

Who? Danielle

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

Danielle knows where the key is

Info about where the

key is

Where’s the key? It is on top of the

bookshelf

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

You need to open the door with one of the

keys

Info about which key he should use

Which key? This key

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

We’re not going to play the game here

Info about where to play

the game?

Where are we going to play?

At the table

Prompted Spontaneous

Novel

64

127

Examples of How To Contrive MO For Manding For Information Manding

Manding “What”

The teacher will bring in a paper bag with things the child likes inside the bag (i.e. little toys, gummies, books). The teacher will look inside the bag and say “Wow, look at this!” while keeping the bag closed. Prompt the child to say “What is it?” or “What is in there?” Teacher says it is a book and removes the item from the bag and delivers the book to the child. Teacher presents a field of three or more cards and objects both mastered and target items. Present SD, “Tell me what is on the table.” Prompt “What is it?” when the child comes to the unknown item. Teacher will tact item and give reinforcement. Teacher says, “I have a surprise for you.” Prompt, “What?,” “What is it?,” or “What do you have?” Tell the child what it is you have and deliver the item. Teacher says, “I want to play.” Prompt, “What do you want to play?” Teacher says, “(Name of reinforcing game or toy).”

128

Manding “Where”

Present the child with a closed box that has a reinforcer (candy works best) in it and say, “This is for you.”

Present the box two times with the reinforcer in it. On the third time, the box will be empty.

Prompt, “Where?,” or “Where is my candy?”

Say, “Oh, I forgot, it’s in the pantry”

While doing an activity, the teacher will abruptly end the activity with no warning and say,

“come on.”

The teacher should prompt, “Where are we going?” The teacher will then say, “To play on

the computer (or name any reinforcing item or activity that is more reinforcing than the item

they are leaving).”

The teacher should say, “Get the,” or “Give me the,” requiring the child to find an item

necessary for a reinforcing task (e.g. “Go get your shoes so we can go outside”).

The necessary item will not be available or missing from its normal place.

Prompt the child to say, “Where are my shoes?”

The teacher should then give the location of the shoes.

65

129

Manding “Where” continued Have the child come to sit, but have no chair for him/her.

Prompt, “Where is my chair?”

Have the child sitting and suddenly get up and say, “I will be right back.”

Prompt, “Where are you going?”

Teacher should say, “To get a gummy (or other reinforcing item) for you.”

Teacher will deliver lunch with no utensils.

Prompt, “Where is my spoon?” or “Where is my fork?”

Teacher will present crafts with one necessary item missing (i.e. glue) and say, “Okay, put

some glue on it.”

Prompt, “Where is the glue?”

Have the child come to the table for a preferred activity (e.g. Legos) but have only one piece

on the table.

Prompt, “Where are the rest?”

130

Manding “Why”

Teacher will put a chair on the table while the child is engaging in another activity. Then tell the child, “Go sit down.” When the child returns to the table, the teacher should prompt, “Why is the chair there?” Teacher can answer with something like, “I was cleaning the floor and look what I found under your chair” while handing the child a reinforcer. Teacher says, “I am going outside to play.” Prompt, “Why can’t I go?” Teacher should say, “You can, follow me!” At meal time, the teacher should put a NON food item on the child’s plate and give the plate to the child. Prompt the child to say, “Why did you do that?” Teacher should act as if they got mixed up and present the child with the correct plate. The child is doing a reinforcing activity (e.g. watching television) and the teacher turns it off with no warning. Prompt, “Why did you do that?” or “Why did you turn it off?” Teacher should say, “So we can go to the playground.” (Remember the teacher must pick an activity that is MORE reinforcing to the child than what he/she was just doing)

66

131

Manding “How”

Teacher will have a see-through jar of desired items and the child will mand for the items. After manding, the teacher should acknowledge the mand by saying, “Oh, sure you can have it.” At the same time, hand the tightly closed jar to the child. The teacher will prompt, “How do I open the jar?” or “How do I open it?” The teacher will show the child how to open the jar. Teacher will say, “Lets go outside and play” and take the child to a locked door and say, “Okay, open the door, let’s go.” The teacher will prompt “How do I open the door?” when they see the child seems puzzled as to how to open the door. Teacher will say, “Oh, like this.” while using a key. Teacher will present the child with a task (e.g. Legos, train set, blocks) and say, “Let’s make a bulldozer.” Prompt, “How do I build a bulldozer?” or “How do I build that?” Teacher will respond, “Oh, here, let me show you.” Remember to choose an activity that cannot be done by the child and an activity the child would want to participate in the completion of. Play with a toy that the child cannot operate by themselves. Make the toy do something such as play music or make a noise. Prompt the child to ask, “How did you do that?”

132

Manding “Which”

Teacher will set up a situation where two similar reinforcers are on the table and say, “Give me a gummy (one is red and one is blue).” Prompt, “Which one?” Teacher says, “The red one.” The child should hand the red one to the teacher and the teacher should give the other item to the child. Teacher should put a reinforcer in their hand and switch it back and forth, hiding the location. With hands extended out, prompt, “Which hand?” Say, “This one” and deliver the reinforcer from hand to the child. Teacher will put out three containers that are the same and move them around with a reinforcing item under them. Tell the child, “You can have the cookie.” Prompt the child to ask, “Which one is it under?” Teacher should offer the child two cookies and say, “You can only have one.” Prompt, “Which one can I have?”

67

133

Manding “Who”

Have three people in the room and say, “Someone has a gummy for you.” Prompt, “Who?” or “Who does?” Give the name of the person and the child walks to the person and gets the reinforcer. Teacher presents pictures of known people (e.g. mom, dad, grandparents) and unknown professionals. The teacher holds up one picture and says, “Who is it?” Only ask one time when starting the game. When an unknown person is held up, prompt, “Who is that?” and tell the child who it is. Using toys that are reinforcing to the child, the teacher will hide a toy character behind a barrier and say, “Guess who is behind here?” Prompt, “Who?” Show the item and name the item and let the child have it.

134

Manding “When”

Place a highly desired item on the table and when the child mands for it, the teacher should say, “Not right now.” Prompt, “When can I have it?” or “When is it my turn?” The teacher should say, “After (name person) is done with it.” Prompt peer to put it down (reinforce peer for doing so) and teacher tells child, “Now you can have it.”

68

Extensions of the CMO-T Research • The CMO-T has recently been implicated in the teaching of eye gaze and social

referencing (Holth, 2005) and joint attention (Dube, MacDonald, Mansfield, Holcomb & Ahearn, 2004; Holth, 2005; Taylor and Hoch, 2008; )

• The term does not appear directly in any of these studies however the

descriptions of how social stimuli are conditioned as reinforcers clearly suggests that the manipulation of a CMO-T was the effective independent variable.

• For example, Dube et al. (2004) suggested that the sight of an “interesting

event” that is not simultaneously seen by a nearby adult will alter the value of the adult’s attention as a reinforcer and evoke all behavior that has produced that form of reinforcement in the past.

• The example they provide is related to a cat suddenly appearing in a location

where that would be unexpected.

135

• Taylor and Hoch (2008) make use of a similar analysis in their research designed to teach joint attending skills to children with autism.

• Dube et al. (2004) conclude that failure to acknowledge the role of the CMO-T when teaching joint attention to children with autism may ultimately lead to the undesirable outcome of teaching “imitations of meaningful behavior”(p.216).

• The importance of the CMO-T as a behavioral variable may well extend beyond mand training.

• It appears that the CMO-T may play an important role in teaching social skills and language pragmatic skills to persons who do not acquire these skills typically.

136

69

Conditioning Social Attention as a Reinforcer

• Autism is a disorder of impairment of social reciprocity.

• Social deficits have been identified as the core underlying feature of autism spectrum disorder (White, Koenig & Scahill, 2007).

• In fact the deficit does not appear to improve over time and may even worsen as the demands for more complex social interactions increase with age (Carter, Davis, Klin & Volkmar, 2005).

• Of particular concern early in social development is the failure to develop joint attention skills (Isaksen & Holth, 2009).

• “Joint attention has been described as two persons actively sharing attention to an object or an event, while they are monitoring each other’s attention to that object or the event.” (Isaksen & Holth, 2009, p.216).

137

• Failure to develop this important repertoire has been associated with overall problems with social relatedness including weak language and general social functioning later in life. (Baron-Cohen, 1995, Mundy, 1995).

Conditioning Social Attention as Reinforcer

• Typically developing children ultimately learn to respond to bids from others for joint attention or initiate joint attention responses without explicit training.

• Responding to joint attention seems to develop more quickly in some children with autism since the reinforcer for this response is usually not social.

• In other words, responding to someone’s point, eye gaze or gesture and comment to look at something frequently results in the sight of something reinforcing.

• On the other hand, initiation of bids for joint attention require a different analysis.

138

70

• A bid for joint attention is reinforced by the reaction or response of another person suggesting the reinforcing value of the social attention the bid produces. (Dube, MacDonald, Mansfield, Holcomb & Ahearn, 2004; Holth, 2005; Isaksen & Holth, 2009).

• Using Dube et al’s analysis here is what may happen to evoke initiations of joint attention.

• First, it is not just eye contact as depicted below.

139

140

# 2 Unexpected

Appearance of a Cat is

Motivating Operation

Conditions the Sight of

Adult Attending to the CAT

& Their Reaction as a

Reinforcer

EVOKES

Gaze Shift and Point and

Vocalizations

“Hey, Look at That Cat”

# 3 Adult Attention

to Cat is a Reinforcer

for JA Bid

AND

Also an SD

FOR

Additional Child Play

Responses

That are Reinforced

by the Adult’s

Continued Attention

and Interactions

# 1 In a Child

Who Has Learned

the Value of Adult

Attention

Kellen Video

71

• All of this is dependent upon having a history in which an adult’s or another child’s interactions improves most activities.

• Social attention must first be conditioned as a reinforcer before initiations for joint attention will occur.

• Several studies that have attempted to teach joint attention using behavior analytic methods but have failed to condition social attention as a reinforcer. (For review see Isaksen & Holth, 2009).

• Instead, it appears that some have taught “imitations of meaningful behavior” (Dube et al., 2005, p.205).

• Lets look at the behavioral variables and methods of conditioning social attention as a reinforcer.

141

142

Teaching Eye Contact as A Social/Language Pragmatic Skill

• Failure to develop eye contact in the early years may ultimately affect the development of language and social behaviors later in life. (Guralnick, Connor, Hammond, Gottman, & Kinnish,1996).

• Lack of eye contact in children with autism may also affect how others react to the child.

• For example, low rates of eye contact has led to the conclusions that children with autism are aloof, abnormal, impersonal or detached (Hutt & Ounstead, 1966).

72

143

• Despite the importance of this issue a limited number of behavior analytic studies have addressed this important issues.

• Until the 1980s, the predominant concern with eye gaze behavior regarded its role as a supposed prerequisite to intensive instruction of other skills (Foxx, 1977; Lovaas, 1977; Lovaas, 1981; Helgeson, Fantuzzo, Smith, & Barr, 1989). The argument was that a child who did not orient toward an instructor would be unable to learn and respond. (Foxx, 1977; Lovaas, 1977; Lovaas, 1981; Helgeson, Fantuzzo, Smith, & Barr, 1989)

• In one variation, Foxx (1977) introduced an experimental condition that combined the

use of reinforcement and punishment in the form of an overcorrection procedure; if a child did not perform the target behavior, an unspecified period would follow during which the child was prompted through a random rotation of any of three head positions each of which he maintained for 15 sec.

• In another variation (Helgeson et al., 1989), children were prompted to maintain eye

contact as they responded to a series of questions. In some reports the authors also prompted the eye contact responses by holding a reinforcing item at eye level (Greer & Ross, 2007; Hwang & Hughes, 1995). Other prompting procedures included physically guiding the child’s head to look at the researcher. (Greer & Ross, 2007; Hegelson, Fantuzzo, Smith & Barr, 1989).

• While each of these interventions reported increases in eye contact, neither generalization to novel therapists nor generalization to novel settings was achieved, though Lovaas (1981) did stress the importance of programming for generalization.

• Despite the capacity of behavioral interventions to increase eye contact, there has been increasing concern regarding the functionality of such interventions. (Seibert, & Oller, 1981; Mirenda et al., 1983; Rollins, 1999; Arnold, Semple, Beale, & Fletcher-Flinn, 2000; Turkstra, 2005)

• Although some studies employed behavior analytic principles to increase the eye contact of autistic children, each neglected to present a behavioral analysis of eye contact to guide their methods to teach this important social and language pragmatic behavior.

• In a paper by Carbone, O’Brien, Sweeney-Kerwin and Albert (2013) an analysis of how to condition social attention as a reinforcer for eye contact as a language pragmatic skills was offered followed by case study data suggesting the value of the approach.

144

73

145

146

Child Wants Something –

Needs Someone Else to

Deliver it

Conditioned Transitive

Motivating Operation

Sight of a Listener’s

Face and Eyes

Reinforcer for the

Looking Response

+

SD for the Mand

Behavioral Analysis of Eye Contact

During Language Training Following frequent exposure to the variables that control the mand response the

following behavioral chain occurs:

Conditions the Sight of the

Face and Eyes of a

Listener as a Reinforcer

Evokes Looking for Face

and Eyes of a Listener

Mand Response is Evoked

Child Mands

Delivery of the Item

Acts as Reinforcer

For Mand

Italiced Words = Stimuli

Bold Words = Behavioral Variables

Standard Print Words = Effects of Behavioral Variables

Jack Eye Contact Video

74

147

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Ma

nd

s A

cco

mp

an

ied

wit

h E

ye

Co

nta

ct

Sessions

Baseline Time Delay and Differential Reinforcement Procedure during Mand Training

Figure 1. Percentage of Mands Accompanied by Eye Contact per session

during baseline and treatment conditions and across four different

instructors

The CMO-T and Teaching Social Skills • Sophisticated social skills in children are acquired and maintained when

attention and reactions of adults and other children act as reinforcers. (Dube et al. 2004; Isaksen & Holth, 2009)

• This repertoire does not develop easily and without instruction for some

children with autism. • Failure to come easily under the control of social reactions of others may be the

greatest barrier to social development in children with autism. • The behavioral literature suggests that pairing or correlating neutral stimuli

(social attention) with established reinforcers may result in the neutral stimuli becoming conditioned or secondary reinforcers. (Copper, Heron & Heward, 2007)

• Isaksen & Holth (2009) suggests that pairing social attention of adults and other

children may not be sufficient and he relies on the early work of Lovaas (1966) and early stimulus control research as support for his conclusions.

148

75

• They suggests that is necessary to also condition the neutral stimulus as a discriminative stimulus (SD) for a response that ultimately results in acquiring a reinforcer.

• In other words, to condition social attention as a reinforcer it will be necessary to first condition attention as a discriminative stimulus that is positively correlated with the availability of reinforcement for some response (SD). .

• Early social development usually includes a progression from wanting others to interact, to attending to what other people do, and imitating what they do. (Sundberg, 2008)

• By about 18 months children begin manding from others during play and then at about 24-30 months children mand for others to join them in play.

• This behavior is of course predicated on the notion that the social attention of other children are now conditioned as a reinforcer.

• This generally occurs without explicit programming by parents or teachers.

149

• If this type of social development does not occur then specific arrangements of contingencies may result in the conditioning of other children’s attention as reinforcers and therefore increased age appropriate social responding.

Peer Manding

• On the following slide is a behavioral analysis of the social response of manding for others to join in play activities.

• Note the central role of the CMO-T in developing this important skill.

150

76

151

Sylvia Wants to Bounce.

Meghan Improves Bouncing

But

Meghan Not on Trampoline

1

Conditioned Transitive

Motivating Operation

Sight of Meghan

is a

Reinforcer for the

Looking Response

+

3 SD for the Mand to

Join Her on the

Trampoline

Behavioral Analysis of Early Social Skills Training

ACTIVITY # 12

Following frequent exposure to the variables that control the response the following

behavioral chain occurs:

2 Conditions the Sight of

Meghan as a Reinforcer

Evokes Looking For

Meghan

Mand Response is Evoked

Sylvia Mands

The approach and

Jumping on the

Trampoline

Acts as Reinforcer

For Mand

Italiced Words = Stimuli

Bold Words = Behavioral Variables

Standard Print Words = Effects of Behavioral Variables

Andrew

Sylvia and

Meghan

REFERENCES

Arnold, A., Semple, R. J., Beale, I., & Fletcher-Flinn, C. M. (2000). Eye contact in children’s social interactions: What is normal behavior? Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 25(3), 207-216.

Berler, E. S., Gross, A. M., & Drabman, R. S. (1982). Social skills training with children: Proceed with caution. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 15, 41-53.

Bloom,L. & Lahey, M. (1978) Language Development and Language Disorders, John Wiley and Sons: New York.

Carbone, V. J., Morgenstern, B., Zecchin-Tirri, G. & Kolberg, L. (2010). The role of the reflexive-conditioned motivating operation (CMO-R) during discrete trial instruction of children with autism. Focus on Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 25, 110-124.

Carter, A. S., Davis, N. O., Klin, A., & Volkmar, F. R. (2005).Social development in autism. In F. R. Volkmar, R. Paul, A.Klin, & D. Cohen (Eds.), Handbook of autism and pervasive developmental disorders: Vol. 1. Diagnosis, development, neurobiology, and behavior. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Carr, E. G., & Kologinsky, E. (1983). Acquisition of sign language by autistic children II: Spontaneity and generalization effects. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 16, 297-314.

Dube, W. V., MacDonald, R. P. F., Mansfield, R. C., Holcomb, W. L., & Ahern, W. H. (2004). Toward a behavioral analysis of joint attention. The Behavior Analyst, 27, 197–207.

Duker, P. C., & van Lent, C. (1991). Inducing variability in communicative gestures used by severely retarded individuals. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24(2), 379-386.

152

77

153

Endicott, K. & Higbee, T.S. (2007). Contriving motivating operations to evoke mands

for information in preschoolers with autism. Research in Autism Spectrum

Disorders, 1, 210- 217.

Foxx, R. M. (1977). Attention training: The use of overcorrection avoidance to

increase the eye contact of autistic and retarded children. Journal of Applied

Behavior Analysis, 10, 489-499.

Greer, D. R., & Ross, D. E. (2007). Verbal Behavior Analysis. U.S.A. Pearson

Education, Inc.

Guralnick, M. J., Connor, R. T., Hammond, M. A., Gottman, J. M., & Kinnish, K.

(1996). The peer relations of preschool children with communication disorders.

Child Development, 67, 471-489.

Hall, G. A., & Sundberg, M. L. (1987). Teaching mands by manipulating conditioned

establishing operations. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 5, 41-53.

Harding, J. W., Wacker, D. P., Berg, W. K., Rick, G., & Lee, J. F. (2004). Promoting

response variability and stimulus generalization in martial arts training. Journal of

Applied Behavior Analysis, 37(2), 185-195.

Helgeson, D. C., Fantuzzo, J. W., Smith, C., & Barr, D. (1989). Eye-contact skill

training for adolescents with developmental disabilities and severe behavior

problems. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 24(1), 56-62.

Holth, P. (2005). An operant analysis of joint attention skills. Journal of Early and

Intensive Behavioral Intervention, 2, 160–175.

154

Hutt, C., & Ounsted, C. (1966). The biological significance of gaze aversion with

particular reference to the syndrome of infantile autism. Behavioral Science, 11,

346-356.

Hwang, B., & Hughes, C. (1995). Effects of social interactive strategies on early

social- communicative skills of a preschool child with developmental disabilities.

Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities,

30(4), 336-349.

Hwang, B., & Hughes, C. (2000). Increasing early social-communicative skills of

preverbal preschool children with autism through social interactive training.

Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 25(1), 18-28.

Hwang, B., & Hughes, C. (2000). The effects of social interactive training on early

social communicative skills of children with autism. Journal of Autism and

Developmental Disorders, 30(4), 331-343.

Isaksen, J. & Holth, P. (2009) An operant approach to teaching joint attention skills to

children with autism. Behavioral Interventions, 24, 215 – 236.

Keller, F. S., & Schoenfeld, W. N. (1950). Principles of psychology. New York:

Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Koegel, R. L., & Frea, W. D. (1993). Treatment of social behavior in autism through

the modification of pivotal social skills. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26,

369-377.

Lalli, J. S., Zanolli, K., & Wohn, T. (1994). Using extinction to promote response

variability in toy play. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(4), 735-736.

78

Langthorne, P., & McGill, P. (2009) A tutorial on the concept of the motivating operation and its importance to application. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 2, 22-31.

Lerman, D. C., & Iwata, B. A. (1996). Developing a technology for the use of operant extinction in clinical settings: An examination of basic and applied research. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29(3), 345-382.

Lovaas, O. I., Freitag, G., Kinder, M. I., Rubenstein, B. D., Schaeffer, B., & Simmons, J. Q. (1966).Establishment of social reinforcers in two schizophrenic children on the basis of food. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 4, 109–125.

Lovaas, O. I. (1977). The autistic child: Language development through behavior modification. New York: Irvington.

Lovaas, O. I. (1981). Teaching developmentally disabled children. The “Me” Book. Austin, TX: PRO-ED, Inc.

Marion, C., Martin, G. L., Yu, C.T., Buhler, C. (2011) Teaching children with autism spectrum disorder to mand “What is it?”. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorder, 5, 1584-1597.

Marion, C., Martin, G. L., Yu, C.T., Buhler, C, & Kerr, D. Teaching children with autism spectrum disorder to mand “Where”. Journal of Behavioral Education. in press. Doi:10.1007/s10864-012-9148-y.

Marion, C., Martin, G. L., Yu, C.T., Buhler, C, Kerr, D. & Claeys, A. (2012). Teaching children with autism spectrum disorder to mand for information using “Which”. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 45, 865 – 870.

McGill, P. (1999). Establishing operations: Implications for the assessment, treatment, and prevention of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 393-418.

Michael, J. (1982). Distinguishing between discriminative and motivational functions of stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 149-155.

155

Michael, J. (1988). Establishing operations and the mand. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 6,3-9. Michael, J. (1993). Establishing operations. The Behavior Analyst, 16, 191-206. Michael, J. (2000). Implications and refinements of the establishing operation concept. Journal

of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33, 401-410 Michael, J. (2004). Concepts and Principles of Behavior Analysis. Kalamazoo, MI: Association for

Behavior Analysis International. Michael, J. (2007). Motivating operations. In J. O. Cooper, T. E. Heron, & W. L.

Heward, Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.) (pp. 374-391). Upper Saddle River NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.

Mirenda, P. L., Donnellan, A. M., & Poder, D. E. (1983). Gaze behavior: A new look at an old problem. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 13(4), 397-409.

Morgan, D. L., & Lee, K. (1996). Extinction-induced response variability in humans. Psychological Record, 46(1), 145-159.

Mundy, P., Sigman, M., Ungerer, J., & Sherman, T. (1986). Defining the social deficits of autism: The contribution of non-verbal communication measures. Journal of Child Psychiatry, 27(5), 657-669.

Neuringer, A., Kornell, N., & Olufs, M. (2001). Stability and variability in extinction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 27(1), 79-94.

Pierce, K., & Schreibman, L. (1995). Increasing complex social behaviors in children with autism: Effects of peer-implemented pivotal response training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 285-295.

Prutting, C. A. (1982). Pragmatics as social competence. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 47, 123-134.

Pryor, K. W., Haag, R., O'Reilly, J. (1969). The creative porpoise: Training for novel behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12(4), 653-661.

156

79

157

Rollins, P. R. (1999). Early pragmatic accomplishments and vocabulary development

in preschool children with autism. American Journal of Speech-Language

Pathology, 8, 181-190.

Rosales & Rehfeldt (2007) Contriving Transitive Conditioned Establishing Operations

to Establish Derived Manding Skills in adults with Severe Developmental

Disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 105–121.

Roy-Wsiaki, G, Marion C., Martin, G., Yu, C. T. (2010). Teaching a child with autism to

request information by asking “What?” Developmental Disabilities Bulletin, 38, 55-

74.

Seibert, J. M., & Oller, D. K. (1981). Linguistic pragmatics and language intervention

strategies. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 11(1), 75-88.

Shafer, E. (1994). A review of interventions to teach a mand repertoire. The Analysis of

Verbal Behavior,12,53-66.

Shillingsburg, M. A., Valentino, A. L. (2011) Teaching a child with autism to mand for

information using “How”. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 27, 179 – 184.

Sigafoos, J., Doss, S., & Reichle, J. (1989). Developing mand and tact repertoires in

persons with sever developmental disabilities using graphic symbols. Research in

Developmental Disabilities, 10, 183-200.

Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal Behavior. Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group.

Smith, R. G., & Iwata, B. A. (1997). Antecedent influences on behavior disorders.

Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 343-375.

Sundberg, M. (1993). The application of establishing operation. The Behavior Analyst,

16, 215-218.

Sundberg, M. L., & Michael, J. (2001). The value of Skinner’s analysis of verbal behavior for teaching children with autism. Behavior Modification, 25, 698-724. Sundberg, M. L., Loeb, M., Hail, L., & Eigenheer, P. (2002). Contriving establishing operations to

teach mands for information. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 18, 14-28. Sundberg, M. L. (2005). A behavioral analysis of motivation and its relation to mand training. In

L. W. Williams (Ed.). Development disabilities: Etiology, assessment, intervention, and integration (pp. 1-22). Reno, NV: Context Press.

Sundberg, M. (2008). The Verbal Behavior Milestones Assessment and Placement Program: The VBMAPP. Concord, CA: AVB Press.

Taylor, B. A., & Hoch, H. (2008). Teaching children with autism to respond to and initiate bids for joint attention. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 41, 337–391.

Tiegerman, E., & Primavera, L. H. (1984). Imitating the autistic child: Facilitating communicative gaze behavior. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 14(1), 27-38.

Turkstra, L. S. (2005). Looking while listening and speaking: Eye-to-face gaze in adolescents with and without traumatic brain injury. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 1429-1441.

Wilder, D. A., & Carr, J. E. (1998). Recent advances in the modification of establishing operations to reduce aberrant behavior. Behavioral Interventions, 13, 43-59.

Williams G., Donley C. R., Keller J. W. (2000). Teaching children with autism to ask questions about hidden objects. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. Winter;33(4):627–630.

White, S.W., Koenig, K. & Schall, L. (2007) Social skills development in children with autism spectrum disorders. A review of the intervention research. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 37, 1858-1868.

158