7/22/2013
1
Ruth Anne Rehfeldt, PhD, BCBA-D
Clarissa S. Barnes, PhD., BCBA
Andrew Blowers, & Kristen Whiteford
Southern Illinois University
Contriving Transitive Conditioned
Motivating Operations to Establish
Manding Skills Establishing Derived Manding in Children
with Severe Developmental Disabilities
Using a Touch Screen Computer
Simon Dymond1, Katharine Still1, Robert Whelan2
1 Swansea University
2 University College Dublin
Objectives • Explore the history of the term Motivating Operation in
Behavior Analysis
• Distinguish between contriving and capturing MOs for mand instruction
• Define and provide examples of contriving transitive conditioned motivating operations
• Discuss research-based strategies for teaching mands under the control of transitive conditioned motivating operations
• Discuss how the stimulus equivalence program can be used in conjunction with contriving CMOs-T
• Describe procedures for establishing complex mands
Rehfeldt & Barnes-Holmes, Eds. (2009)
Brief Introduction to Motivating
Operations and their Relevance
for Language Instruction
On the Concept of Establishing Operation • Older term than people realize!
– Keller & Schoenfeld (1950): a variable that momentarily establishes the reinforcing effectiveness of some other object or event (i.e., water deprivation momentarily establishes water as an effective reinforcer; changes in temperature above or below the optimal level establish changes in the opposite direction as effective reinforcement (Michael, 1988)
– EO: (Michael, 1988): Two defining features: 1) monetarily increases the effectiveness of a reinforcer; and 2) evokes responding that has been reinforced by the specific reinforcer in the past.
– Michael (1993) called these the reinforcer establishing and the evocative effects of EOs.
7/22/2013
2
UEOs vs. CEOs • Some stimuli have their reinforcer-establishing effects
without any learning (evolution has made us to be reinforceable by food, water; sexual rft; or pain reduction) (UEO; Michael, 1988; 1993)
• Many reinforcer-establishing effects for a variety of stimuli are learned (CEO; Michael, 1988) (i.e., a rat lever presses to remove the presentation of a light which has been paired with electric shock – the offset of the light reinforces lever pressing because it is a warning stimulus, a CEO, for the painful stimulus)
• CEOs are not the same as discriminative stimuli: Sds signal the differential availability of reinforcement if a specific response occurs and not in the absence of the specific response.
• EOs, on the other hand, make other events reinforcers and increase the frequency of responding that produces the reinforcer.
Types of CEOs: • CEO: Variables that alter the reinforcing efficacy of other events, but only
because of the person’s learning history.
• Alter the momentary frequency of the type of behavior that has been
reinforced or punished by those other events.
• 3 types: All stimuli that were “motivationally neutral” prior to their relation
to another EO or to a form of reinforcement or punishment (Michael,
1993).
– Surrogate CEO: Neutral event may be paired with a UEO or another
CEO, as a result, the neutral event acquires the motivational
characteristics of the UEO.
– Reflexive CEO: Neutral event precedes some form of worsening.
Responding to terminate that stimulus results in worsening not
occurring, and response frequency momentarily increases (threat or
promise CEO; Michael, 1988; 1993)
– Transitive CEO: Correlation of a stimulus with the correlation
between another stimulus and a form of unconditioned reinforcement.
Transitive CEO: • Michael, 1993: S1 is correlated with the correlation
between S2 and some form of improvement or worsening, the presence of S1 establishes the reinforcing or punishing effectiveness of S2 and evokes or suppresses the behavior that has been followed by that consequence.
• Many forms of conditioned reinforcement or punishment are contingent upon other stimulus conditions (context).
• Example (Michael, 1993): A workman needs a slotted screwdriver to disassemble equipment when he sees a slotted screw. He requests the screwdriver from his assistant. The slotted screw is a CEO for the request, as they have been correlated with successful disassembly and have value for that reason.
On the Term Motivating Operation
• Laraway et al. (2003): Some elements of the EO definition are problematic for ABA
• Many motivating variables decrease the effectiveness of consequences (i.e., NCR; medications)
• Michael (1993): Term “abolishing” to describe such effects was inconvenient.
• The term “motivating operation” was introduced to capture both the establishing and abolishing functions of certain variables.
On the Term Motivating Operation, cont.
• Motivating variables may affect multiple behaviors – i.e., sleep deprivation reduced the value of praise as a reinforcer and increased the value of edibles (Horner et al., 1997; as cited in Laraway et al., 2003).
• Motivating variables increase the effectiveness of punishers as well.
• Evocative effect = behavior altering effect
• EO = MO!
Importance of MOs for Language
Instruction
• Mand (Skinner, 1957): A verbal operant under the control of MO, where the consequence is that specified in the mand (i.e., a request for juice when thirsty results in the delivery of juice).
• Typically developing children and adults do not need professional support for a mand repertoire because the mand directly benefits the speaker (Michael, 1988).
7/22/2013
3
Why is Mand Instruction
Sometimes Neglected?
• Practitioners have to CAPTURE MOs (keep their eyes out for MO’s)
• Practitioners have to CONTRIVE MOs (artificially create a motivating operation to increase the value of some stimulus as a reinforcer)
• Not understood that it is the only verbal operant that directly benefits the speaker or learner (Michael, 1988)
• Neglected in standardized language assessments (Michael, 1988)
“Momentary” aspect of the MO • Sundberg (1993): The Application of Establishing
Operations:
• To use an MO as an IV, behavior analyst must either capture or contrive the reinforcing effectiveness of an event (T-CMO can be both).
• Capturing: Capitalize on the MO as it occurs naturally:
• Contriving: present a stimulus that increases the value of another stimulus – Making coffee and withholding the hot water: Coffee increases
the value of hot water and evokes behavior that is followed by that form of reinforcement; now teach a mand for “coffee” (Sundberg, 1993, p. 212)
– Child sees fire truck outside window, which increases the value of an open door and evokes behavior that has resulted in doors opening in the past. Caregiver conducts a mand trial for the word “open” (Sundberg, 1993; p. 212)
Transitive CMOs: Critical for
Establishment of Mand Repertoire • Capturing:
• 1. Child shows interest in movie. Teach the mand “movie” when he is eyeing the DVD and banging the movie case and reinforce with remote.
• 2. Child tries to reach toy on shelf. Teach mand “please help” and reinforce with adult reaching the item on the shelf.
• Contriving:
• 1. Withhold sock as a child is dressing in the morning. Teach a mand for “sock” and reinforce with the delivery of the sock. (Incidental teaching)
• 2. Withhold crayons that child needs to color a picture. Teach mand for “crayon” and reinforce with the delivery of the crayon.
Additional Ideas for Contriving
Transitive MOs:
• 1. Provide learner with incorrect change when using a vending machine, and teach mand for correct coins (Langthorne et al.)
• 2. Withhold access to any everyday item needed for individual to accomplish some daily living task (toothbrushing, eating, etc.)
• 3. Withhold access to any everyday item needed for individual to accomplish some scholastic living task (calculator, pencil, etc.)
• One stimulus change establishes the reinforcing value of a second stimulus change
Contriving Transitive Conditioned
Motivating Operations:
Interrupted Chain Procedure
Hunt, Morgan, Alwell, & Sailor
(1986)
Using an Interrupted Behavior Chain
Strategy to Tech Generalized
Communication Responses
7/22/2013
4
Purpose:
• Demonstrate the effectiveness of the
interrupted chain procedure to teach
communicative responses
• To demonstrate the generalization of these
responses when common stimuli are
programmed
– Untaught communicative responses in new
behavioral chains
Participants:
Behavior Chains
Target Responses:
Monica: point to target picture in a 3 card array (target, partial drawing, and blank)
Everett: point to “want” + the picture of item in a 4 picture array
Nate: hold communication book with the word “want” on it
Pretests and Posttests:
Receptive label (listener responding)
Show me _______
Interrupted Chain Instruction:
• Correct Responses: praise
+ cue to continue sequence
• Incorrect Response:
• Experimenter modeled correct response and used manual guidance. No rft for prompted response; trial represented.
– Correct response = praise and cue to continue the sequence
– Incorrect = removal of items and termination of instruction
What do you want? Test Outcomes
• First, would participants request the items for
the sequence in the absence of reinforcement?
• Second, would they request NOVEL items
needed for NOVEL sequences?
7/22/2013
5
• Results:
Results
• Pretest/posttest
– Receptive label (listener responding)
Hall & Sundberg (1987)
Teaching Mands by Manipulating
Conditioned Establishing Operations
Purpose:
• Teach mands (manual sign) by manipulating conditioned MOs
• Assess generalization of mands taught
• Assess the emergence of untaught mands after teaching participants to tact the stimuli
– i.e., would first teaching participants to tact the items needed to complete the chain be more effective than directly teaching the mand (using imitative and tact prompts and fading those prompts) for the item alone?
Participants:
– Two students with severe intellectual disability and
deafness
• 16-17 years-old
– S1 = male
– S2 = female
• Low rates of manding
– No manding for missing items
• Extensive tact repertoires
– Response modality – sign
The chains:
• Behavior chain instruction (most-least prompting)
1. Making instant soup (S1 & S2)
2. Opening a can of fruit (S1 & S2)
3. Wiping up water spilled on a table (S1)
4. Operating a vending machine (S1)
5. Making instant coffee (S2)
6. Coloring a large picture (S2)
1 2 3
7/22/2013
6
Instruction: – MAND INSTRUCTION:
– Tact prompt
• Show the missing item + “what’s that?”
– Incorrect tact = imitative sign prompt
– Correct = missing item + “what do you want”
– Imitative prompt for mand
• “Do this” + model
– Incorrect tact = physical prompt
– Correct = missing item + “what do you want”
WHAT IF TACTS WERE TAUGHT FIRST?
WOULD THAT BE MORE EFFECTIVE?
Results & Conclusions:
• Manding only occurred reliably after directly
teaching the mands first (not tacts first)
What does this mean for you?
• Participants may need lengthy
instructional history before one
operant skill will emerge following
instruction in another area
• Interrupted chain procedure presents
limitless ideas for contriving MO’s
and readily establishing mands
Albert, Carbone, Murray,
Hagerty, Sweeney-Kerwin (2012)
Increasing the Mand Repertoire of
Children with Autism Through the Use
of an Interrupted Chain Procedure
Purpose
• Replicate Hull & Sundberg (1987)
• Extend literature on mand instruction using
interrupted chains
• Test for emergence of untaught tacts following
mand instruction
Method
• Participants – all emitted unprompted mands
– Victor (dx: autism)
• 5 years-old
• Limited tact/intraverbal repertoire
– Nathaniel (dx: autism)
• 8 years-old
• Limited tact/intraverbal repertoire
– Carina (dx: PDD-NOS)
• 5 years-old
• Well developed tact/intraverbal repertoire
Method
• Pre-training
– Taught to
complete
behavior chains
• Physical
prompts w/
prompt fading
7/22/2013
7
Method
• Mand Instruction:
– Echoic prompt
Listen to music
I want the CD player
Method, cont.
• Probes for untaught mand responses
– Identical to baseline except one of the following
components was changed:
• Novel stimuli
• Novel instructor
• Novel setting
• Tact probes
What’s this?
• All 3 showed
emergent tacts;
• 2 participants
performed with 100%
accuracy with novel
chains
Further Ideas for Interrupted Chains: • Any self-care task
• Any art or craft project
• Any simple class-room or house clean-up task
Teaching: use graduated time delay procedure
-Use physical prompts with PECS; modeled prompts with sign; and gradually increase delay before which prompt is delivered. Eventually participant will anticipate correct response during the delay.
-Use vocal prompts for vocal mands with same procedure.
Will Teaching Mands Under
Transitive CMO Control Be More
Effective with PECS or Sign?
7/22/2013
8
Participant:
– Louis:
Louie
Age 51
Diagnoses
Severe MR, intermittent
explosive disorder,
blindness in left eye
ICAP Social
/communicative
age equivalent
1 year 8 months
Communication
method Gestures (nonvocal)
Method
• Teaching mands under transitive MO control – Baseline
– Generalization probes • Different setting and communicative partner
• Teaching mands under transitive CEO control
– Instruction
Method
PECS (phase 3) Sign
Make pudding
Make tea
Stimulus Equivalence & Contriving
Transitive Conditioned Motivating
Operations
Sidman (1994) Account of
Stimulus Equivalence:
Picture names
dictated TO
subject
Pictures
Picture names
spoken BY
subject
Picture printed
names
AD
B
C
AB
CBB
C
CD
BD
AC
Sidman, M. (1994). Equivalence Relations and
Behavior: A Research Story. Cambridge, MA:
7/22/2013
9
Train A-B (match dictated names to pictures); Train A-C (match dictated names to text) When mastered, test B-A (picture naming); C-A (text reading), B-C and C-B matching (reading comprehension) – under EXT
A Behavior Analytic Account of Reading:
• 2 Components of Reading (De Souza, De Rose, Domeniconi, 2009)
– Textual Behavior (verbal responses under precise ctrl. of print or Braille stimuli)
– Comprehension (see Snow, 2007)
• Both components may be established in the absence of direct instruction
• Means by which stimuli come to be symbolic for, or refer to, one another
Another Picture: Rehfeldt, R.A., & Root, S. L. (2005). Establishing derived
requesting skills in adults with severe developmental disabilities.
JABA, 38, 101-105.
• Will a history of reinforced conditional discriminations (names-pictures; names-text) establish derived manding/requesting skills in adults with severe communication deficits?
• If individuals are taught to request desired items via picture exchange, and then are taught to relate those pictures to dictated names and dictated names to text, will they then use text to request desired items? (Functionality of text exchange for adults)
• Will other verbal skills emerge from this history?
“puzzle”
puzzle
Used to mand for actual puzzle
Method • Participants: three adults with severe IDD &
little or no functional communication (IQs ≤ 30)
• Request training procedure: Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) (Frost & Bondy, 1994), Phases 1-3.
• Selection of desired items: multiple stimulus preference assessment w/out replacement
• Stimuli: desired items; dictated names (“A” stimuli), corresponding pictures (“B” stimuli), corresponding printed words (“C” stimuli)
• Design: multiple probe design (Horner & Baer, 1978) across participants
7/22/2013
10
Participant
Sam Kenny Carl
Trace Pizza Candy
Tape Sandwich Mint
Puzzle Markers Trace
Preferred Items:
(Efforts made to ensure similarity in word length)
Procedure • Preliminary Testing
• Test Probes:
– Derived relations: B-A – names pictures; C-A – reads words; B-C/C-B
matches words & pictures;
– Derived Mand (uses “C” stimuli – printed words – to request desired
items).
• PECS Training (Phases 1-3)
• Conditional Discrimination Training
– A-B (matches dictated name to correct picture)
– A-C (matches dictated name to correct text)
• Test Probes
• Training & testing conducted in 9 trial blocks; mastery criterion = 8/9
correct per block; probes presented after ea/ display of mastery
.33
0
.33
.22
0
Sam
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
.22
.89
1
.89
Names
PicturesReads
Words
Matches
Pictures
to Words
Matches
Words to
PicturesDerived
Request
Pretest.67
0
.22
.11
0
Kenny
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
11
.89
1
.89 .89
Names
PicturesReads
Words
Matches
Pictures
to Words Matches
Words to
PicturesDerived
Request
Pretest
0 0
.22
.11
0
Carl
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Posttest
.89
1
.67
Names
Pictures
Reads
Words
Matches
Pictues
to Words
Matches
Words to
Pictures
Derived
Request
Pro
port
ion
of C
orre
ct R
espo
nses
Probes
First Pre-Test Probes
Final Post-Test Probes
Rosales, R., & Rehfeldt, R.A. (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.
• Will a history of reinforced conditional discrimination learning result in derived “pure” mands (under transitive CEO/MO control) for items needed to complete a chained task?
• Will other verbal skills emerge?
• Participants: 3 individuals with severe IDD; IQ ≤ 36
• PECS phases 1-3 (functionality of text exchange for adults)
Chained Tasks:
“Playing Music” “Making Kool-Aid”
• Pick up CD player
• Open face of CD player
• Select CD
• Open CD case
• Insert CD into CD player
• Close CD player
• Pick up headphones
• Plug headphones into CD player
• Push “play” button on CD player.
• Pick up pitcher
• Pick up Kool-Aid® packet
• Open packet completely
• Empty packet into pitcher
• Pick up water jug
• Open water jug
• Pour water into pitcher at least ½ full
• Place jug back on table
• Select spoon from table
• Put spoon in pitcher of water
• Stir until powder completely dissolves
• Remove spoon from pitcher
• Pick up lid
• Place lid tightly on pitcher
• Pick up cup
• Pour Kool-Aid® into cup at least ½ full.
see also LeBlanc & Dillon, 2009 for capturing and contriving MOs
Stimuli A1A2A3
“HEADPHONES”
Stimuli B1B2B3
“SPOON”
Stimuli C1C2C3
“CUP”
Stimuli A1B1C1
Stimuli A2B2C2
Stimuli A3B3C3
7/22/2013
11
Preference Assessment : RAISD and MSWO
P.E.C.S Training & Chained Task
Mand Training within Chained Task
Conditional Discrimination Training : A-B
A-C Training
Mixed A-B and A-C
Post-Test Probes
Pre-Test Probes
Method
B-A C-A B-C C-B Derived Mands
Lucy
0 0
1
.67
.78
.67
.89.89
.22
.89
.78
.89.89
.56
.45
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Pre-Test
Post-Test
Maintenance
Tony
0
1 1 1
.23
.33
.45
.56
.89.89 .89
.78.78
.89
.56
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Vocal
Requesting
Vocal
Requesting
Perc
en
tag
e o
f C
orr
ect
Resp
onse
s p
er
Tri
al
Blo
ck
Establishing Derived Manding in Children
with Severe Developmental Disabilities
Using a Touch Screen Computer
Simon Dymond1, Katharine Still1, Robert Whelan2
1 Swansea University
2 University College Dublin
Probe for derived manding and C-B and B-C derived relations.
Training relations A-C and A-B.
“Train”
A: Spoken Word
‘Train’
C: Written Text B: Picture
Trained
Untrained
C: Written Text
‘Train’
Manding using picture-exchange Manding using text-exchange
7/22/2013
12
Conditional relations training: name-picture (A-B) and name-text (A-C) and derived
relations testing picture-text (B-C) and text-picture (C-B).
Name-picture (A-B) |show me…| Name-text (A-C) |show me…|
Picture-text (B-C) |match| Text-picture (C-B) |match|
Contriving Transitive Conditioned
Motivating Operations:
Teaching Mands for Information
(Question-Asking)
Why teach mands for information?
• Asking questions is functional for the speaker
– “where is daddy?”
– “what’s that?”
– “where is my teddy?”
• Is critical for social interaction and conversations
• Common deficit in children with autism
• Skinner defined a question as a mand which specifies
verbal action
• See Sundberg et al. (2002)
More on Mands for Information
• How is it that they are they under the control
of transitive conditioned motivating
operations?
• Access to the item specified in the mand (i.e.,
the person for a “who” question and the item
for a “where” question) increases the value of
the information supplied by another person.
• Must grant consideration to prerequisite skills
Sundberg, Loeb, Hale, &
Eigenheer (2002)
Contriving Establishing Operations to
Teach Mands for Information
Purpose
• To teach “where” and “who” mands by
contriving establishing operations and
providing only verbal information as a
consequence
• (In other words, teach children to ask questions
beginning with “Where” and “Who” where the
answer supplied by the experimenter serves as
the reinforcer
7/22/2013
13
Method:
Experiment 1
• Participants
– Two boys with autism – Kevin
» 5 years-old
– Billy
» 6 years-old
• Substantial mand, tact, intraverbal repertoire, and
listener repertoires
– Did not emit “where” mands (did not ask questions beginning
with “Where is ________”
Method:
Experiment 1
• Baseline
– “Get your Legos”
• Access to item
– Item returned and distractor activity (e.g., reading a book)
Method:
Experiment 1
• Pretraining
– “Go get your ____, it’s in the ____” + point prompt
• Instruction:
– Identical to BL with feedback
• Told “Go Get Your _______”
• Taught to mand, “Where is _____?” using echoic prompts (i.e., “say ___”
• Reinforcer = being told where item was (and child gaining access)
The Legos are in the green
box Get your Legos
Where are Legos?
Results:
Experiment 1
• “Where” mands
– Kevin
Results: Experiment 1
• “Where” mands
– Billy
Experiment 2 of Sundberg et al. (2002)
• Used participants with similar verbal skills as
in Experiment 1, who did not ask “where” OR
“who” questions.
• This time, participants would be taught to ask
both “where” and “who” questions in one
conversational exchange with the experimenter
7/22/2013
14
Method:
Experiment 2
• Instruction – Child told, “Go get ____”
– Child taught to say “where is _____” using echoic prompts and feedback in the form of information
– To reinforce the above question, the child was told, “I gave it to a teacher.”
– Child was then taught to say, “Who?”
– Incorrect responses resulted in repeated trials and echoic propmts
– Answer to questions (and access to items) reinforced correct mands.
I gave it to a teacher.
Get your Buzz Lightyear
Where is Buzz? Who has it?
The teacher with the red shirt
Results : Experiment 2
• “Where” +
“who” mands
– Kevin
,
More on teaching mands for
information: • Endicott & Higbee (2007) replicated the Sundberg
procedure
• Preschoolers with autism who manded for many items; one of whom had 75 tacts
• Included brief stimulus
• preference assessment
• (Carr, Nicolson, & Higbee, 2000): – Preference selection conducted only
once vs. 3 x
– All items were toys that participants
reliably tacted.
Endicott & Higbee (2007) Procedure:
• 1st ensured that child could go to three
designated locations when instructed (told,
“Go to the (toy box, shelf, or backpack)”
• Taught this skill if necessary.
• Items in 3 designated locations
• Baseline: “Get (item). Mand resulted in
instructor stating the location.
Endicott & Higbee (2007) Procedure:
• Instruction:
– Same as baseline, but:
– If participant did not mand “Where (item)” within 30 s, verbally prompted, “Say ‘Where (item)?”
– Participant then repeated “where (item)?” and instructor stated the location of the missing item (i.e., “it’s (in your backpack).”
– Allowed to interact with item for 30 s.
– 5 trials for highly preferred and least preferred; evaluated generalization in home setting.
7/22/2013
15
• Fig. 1. Results of Experiment 1 (“Where”) for Stewart (upper panel), Braden (middle panel), and Gavin (lower panel). Data are presented as the parentage of correct mands using “where”. HP, high-preference item; LP, low-preference item. The arrow in the treatment phase for Gavin indicates the session where the experimenter.
Experiment 2 Instruction:
• Procedure
1. Identical to intervention condition in experiment 1
except…
2. After the participant asked “Where -?” the
experimenter said “I gave it to somebody.”
3. Echoic prompt “Who has it?” was delivered next if
the participant did not emit the echoic within 30 s
4. Incorrect response: were scored if the response did
not occur within 30 s of the experimenter’s response
“I gave it to somebody.”
Fig 2. Results of Experiment 2 (“Who”) for Stewart (upper panel), Braden (middle panel), and Dillon (lower panel). Data are presented as the percentage of correct mands using “who”. HP, high-preference item; low=preference item.
Conclusions for YOU for teaching:
• Mands for Information can be reliably established using simple prompting procedures and a structured environment
• Doesn’t seem to matter whether the item specified in the mand (i.e., “Where is ____”) is highly preferred or not.
• The information itself is the reinforcer.
Use Script Fading to Establish the
Mands for Information
• Howlett, Sidener, & Progar (2011):
• During instruction, audiotaped script was played (Where’s _____”) out of view of participant
• Scripts faded beginning with full script (“Where’s ____”); then partial script (“Where’s”), then no script.
• Fading began after child responded correctly within 5 s of the full script across 2 sessions.
• Script repeated and experimenter answered question if child did not repeat the script so child could find and play with toy.
7/22/2013
16
New Directions in
Teaching Complex Mands:
• Manding to Terminate Aversive conditions
• Superstitious/Magical Mands
• Metonymical Extensions
• Targeted in PEAK curriculum (Dixon, 2013)
PEAK: Manding to Terminate
Aversive Conditions
• Caregiver establishes a series of 3-5 aversive events
and sets the occasion for the child to mand for
termination of such an event
Caregiver asks if child would like a cookie
Child Says “yes”
Caregiver begins to eat cookie herself
Antecedent Behavior Consequence
Establishing Operation - Aversive
Child says “I want that
one. It’s mine”
Caregiver delivers cookie
to child
Caregiver begins to eat cookie herself
Superstitious/Magical Mands
• Extension of the mand whereby utterances are emitted which are wished to have an impact on the event, but realistically do not. Shaped by the verbal community as a convention of cultural practices
• Rolling a dice…..
– “mama needs a new pair of shoes”
• Broken cell phone
– “come on and work!”
• Cloudy sky
– “It better not rain today”
• A star
– “Star light star bright, first star I see tonight….”
PEAK: Superstitious Mands - 11P
Give child a broken
calculator
Child says “come on and work”
Social reinforcement “Yea, come on and work”
Child says “Bounce
Ball!”
Give child flat ball and say “bounce
ball”
No reinforcement
(test)
Trained Skill Tested Skill
PEAK: Metonymical Extensions
What do you want?
What else can you call it?
(does not give plane)
Airplane
Bird “That’s right!”
(gives plane)
Conclusions
• Questions or Comments?
7/22/2013
17
Ruth Anne Rehfeldt, PhD, BCBA-D
Clarissa S. Barnes, PhD., BCBA
Andrew Blowers, & Kristen Whiteford
Southern Illinois University
Contriving Transitive Conditioned
Motivating Operations to Establish
Manding Skills