Reducing stimulus overselectivity through an increased observing-response requirement

An adult with autism and a mild intellectual disability participated in a 0-s delayed matching-to-sample task. In each trial, two sample stimuli were presented together until the participant completed an observing-response requirement consisting of 1 or 10 mouse clicks in the baseline and experimental phases, respectively. One of the two sample stimuli then appeared randomly as a comparison stimulus (S+), along with two other comparison stimuli (S-). Higher levels of correct responding occurred under the larger observing-response requirement, and the proportion of errors related to one of the two sample stimuli decreased. Thus, stimulus overselectivity was reduced without requiring differential observing responses.     

Age trends in stimulus overselectivity

Stimulus overselectivity refers to the phenomenon whereby stimulus control over behavior is exerted only by a limited subset of the total number of stimuli present during discrimination learning. It often is displayed by individuals with autistic spectrum disorders or learning disabilities, but is not exclusive to those groups. The present studies investigated the impact of aging on stimulus control and overselectivity. Three age groups--18-22, 47-55, and 70-80 year olds-were studied in two experiments. All participants were trained on a simple discrimination task, randomly assigned to one of two conditions (either with or without a distractor task), and then tested for the emergence of overselectivity (Experiment 1). In Experiment 2 responding controlled by the overselected stimulus elements was reduced by introducing a verbal punisher. In subsequent tests, control of behavior by the previously underselected elements from Experiment 1 was enhanced across the two younger age groups but not the oldest group of participants. The results are discussed in relation to the attention-deficit and overshadowing accounts of overselectivity.     

Reduction of stimulus overselectivity with nonverbal differential observing responses

Three individuals with mental retardation exhibited stimulus overselectivity in a delayed matching-to-sample task in which two sample stimuli were displayed on each trial. Intermediate accuracy scores indicated that participants could match one of the samples but not both of them. Accuracy in a baseline condition was compared to accuracy with a differential observing response procedure. This procedure prompted participants to make simultaneous identity-matching responses that required observation and discrimination of both sample stimuli. These observing responses were never followed by differential consequences. When observing responses were prompted, participants' accuracy scores improved. In a return to the baseline condition, when differential observing responses were no longer prompted, accuracy returned to intermediate levels. The results show that stimulus overselectivity can be greatly reduced by a behavioral intervention that controls observing behavior and verifies discrimination, but that exposure to such procedures alone may be insufficient for lasting benefits.     

Reflections on stimulus control

The topic of stimulus control is too broad and complex to be traceable here. It would probably take a two-semester course to cover just the highlights of that field's evolution. The more restricted topic of equivalence relations has itself become so broad that even an introductory summary requires more time than we have available. An examination of relations between equivalence and the more general topic of stimulus control, however, may reveal characteristics of both the larger and the more limited field that have not been generally discussed. Consideration of these features may in turn foster future developments within each area. I speak, of course, about aspects of stimulus control that my own experiences have made salient to me; others would surely emphasize different characteristics of the field. It is my hope that cooperative interactions among researchers and theorists who approach stimulus control from different directions will become more common than is currently typical.     

Previous mindfulness experience interacts with brief mindfulness induction when reducing stimulus overselectivity

The current study examined the effects of a brief mindfulness induction on overselectivity. Participants were randomly assigned to a mindfulness, unfocused attention (relaxation), or no‐intervention group. Participants experienced their designated intervention for 10 min, and they underwent simultaneous discrimination training (AB+ CD?) followed by an extinction test (AvC, AvD, BvC, and BvD). Levels of mindfulness were measured by the Toronto Mindfulness Scale, and participants were asked about their previous experience with mediation and mindfulness practice. Mindfulness reduced overselectivity, and previous levels of mindfulness experience identified by a single question moderated this effect, with mindful‐experienced participants showing less overselectivity. Both findings have some practical utility in the ongoing investigation of the possible use of mindfulness in medical settings.     

A discrimination analysis of training-structure effects on stimulus equivalence outcomes.

Experiments designed to establish stimulus equivalence classes frequently produce differential outcomes that may be attributable to training structure, defined as the order and arrangement of baseline conditional discrimination training trials. Several possible explanations for these differences have been suggested. Here we develop a hypothesis based on an analysis of the simple simultaneous and successive discriminations embedded in conditional discrimination training and testing within each of the training structures that are typically used in stimulus equivalence experiments. Our analysis shows that only the comparison-as-node (many-to-one) structure presents all the simple discriminations in training that are subsequently required for consistently positive outcomes on all tests for the properties of equivalence. The sample-as-node (one-to-many) training structure does not present all the simple discriminations required for positive outcomes on either the symmetry or combined transitivity and symmetry (equivalence) tests. The linear-series training structure presents all the simple discriminations required for consistently positive outcomes on tests for symmetry, but not for symmetry and transitivity combined (equivalence) or transitivity alone. Further, the difference in the number of simple discriminations presented in comparison-as-node training versus the other training structures is larger when the intended class size is greater than three or the number of classes is larger than two. We discuss the relevance of this analysis to interpretations of stimulus equivalence research, as well as some methodological and theoretical implications.     

Comparing structured mix and random rotation procedures to teach receptive labeling to children with autism

We compared two procedures using an alternating treatments design to teach receptive labeling to children with autism. The structured mix procedure followed seven steps entailing mass trials, intermixing, and random rotation. In the random rotation procedure, we trained all stimuli from the start. Study 1 included four children with a repertoire of four to 50 receptive labels and who primarily communicated with an alternative communication device. Results showed that the two conditions were comparable for one participant, structured mix was effective and random rotation was not effective for one participant, and that both conditions were ineffective for two participants. Study 2 included five children with over 200 receptive labels in their repertoire and with vocal speech as the primary form of communication. Four participants acquired the labels in both procedures, but random rotation was more effective. Results indicate that structured mix may be more effective for participants with a limited language repertoire and random rotation is more effective for participants with a larger language repertoire.     

A comparison of methods for teaching receptive labeling to children with autism spectrum disorders

Many early intervention curricular manuals recommend teaching auditory-visual conditional discriminations (i.e., receptive labeling) using the simple-conditional method in which component simple discriminations are taught in isolation and in the presence of a distracter stimulus before the learner is required to respond conditionally. Some have argued that this procedure might be susceptible to faulty stimulus control such as stimulus overselectivity (Green, 2001). Consequently, there has been a call for the use of alternative teaching procedures such as the conditional-only method, which involves conditional discrimination training from the onset of intervention. The purpose of the present study was to compare the simple-conditional and conditional-only methods for teaching receptive labeling to 3 young children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders. The data indicated that the conditional-only method was a more reliable and efficient teaching procedure. In addition, several error patterns emerged during training using the simple-conditional method. The implications of the results with respect to current teaching practices in early intervention programs are discussed.     

Divided stimulus control: a replication and a quantitative model

Four pigeons were trained on a conditional discrimination. The conditional stimuli were compounds of pairs of stimuli from two different dimensions, fast versus slow cycles of red or green stimuli, and short- versus long-duration presentations of these cycles. Across conditions, the probability of reinforcers for correctly responding to each dimension was varied from 0 to 1. Discriminability, measured by log d, for stimuli on a dimension increased as the relative frequency of reinforcers for that dimension increased, replicating the results of Shahan and Podlesnik (2006). Two further conditions showed that discriminability between stimuli on each dimension was unaffected by whether the stimuli on the other dimension varied or were constant. Finally, maximal discriminability was unchanged in a redundant-relevant cues condition in which either of the stimuli comprising a compound signaled the same correct response. Davison and Nevin's (1999) model provided an excellent quantitative account of the effect of relative reinforcer frequency on discriminability, and thus of the way in which divided stimulus control is itself controlled by relative reinforcement.     

Quantitative and methodological aspects of stimulus equivalence

The number of different ways of linking stimuli in the training phase of a conditional discrimination procedure designed to teach equivalence relations has hitherto been underestimated. An algorithm from graph theory that produces the correct number of such different ways is given. The establishment of equivalence relations requires transitive stimulus control. A misconception in a previous analysis of the conditions necessary for demonstrating transitive stimulus control is indicated. This misconception concerns responding in an unreinforced test trial to a negative rather than a positive comparison stimulus. Such behavior cannot be attributed to discriminative control by degree of association with reinforcement if the negative comparison stimulus has been less associated with reinforcement than the positive comparison stimulus in an antecedent training phase.     

Go/no‐go procedure with compound stimuli with children with autism

The go/no‐go with compound stimuli is an alternative to matching‐to‐sample to produce conditional and emergent relations in adults. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of this procedure with two children diagnosed with autism. We trained and tested participants to respond to conditional relations among arbitrary stimuli using the go/no‐go procedure. Both learned all the trained conditional relations without developing response bias or responding to no‐go trials. Participants demonstrated performance consistent with symmetry, but not equivalence.     

Development and crossmodal transfer of contextual control of emergent stimulus relations

Six normally capable adults first learned three conditional relations in each of two prospective equivalence classes via match-to-sample training with figures as conditional (sample) and discriminative (comparison) stimuli. Then one trained conditional relation in each prospective class was brought under the control of contextual stimuli, two dictated nonsense syllables. Test performances indicated the emergence of untrained conditional relations, and therefore two equivalence classes, that were conditional on the contextual stimuli. These tests involved untrained combinations of contextual stimuli and stimuli in conditional relations, suggesting that the contextual stimuli functioned independently to control conditional relations rather than forming compound stimuli with samples and comparisons in training. Next, two novel figures were made equivalent to each of the original dictated contextual stimuli by match-to-sample training and testing. On subsequent tests, all subjects demonstrated transfer of conditional control of untrained conditional relations from the original auditory contextual stimuli to equivalent visual stimuli. These outcomes further supported the conclusion that the contextual stimuli exerted true conditional control over conditional relations in the equivalence classes and were not merely elements of compound stimuli.     

ESTABLISHING DERIVED TEXTUAL CONTROL IN ACTIVITY SCHEDULES WITH CHILDREN WITH AUTISM

Activity schedules are often used to facilitate task engagement and transition for children with autism. This study evaluated whether conditional discrimination training would serve to transfer the control from activity‐schedule pictures to printed words (i.e., derived textual control). Two preschoolers with autism were taught to select pictures and printed words given their dictated names. Following training, participants could respond to printed words by completing the depicted task, match printed words to pictures, and read printed words without explicit training (i.e., emergent relations).     

Teaching effective hand raising to children with autism during group instruction

We taught 3 children with autism to raise a hand or keep both hands down depending on their status (e.g., having heard a target word, possessing a specific item) using modeling, prompting, and reinforcement. All 3 children acquired accurate hand-raising skills in response to progressively more difficult discrimination tasks during group instruction. The implications for preparing children for general education settings are discussed.     

Effects of stimulus presentation order during auditory–visual conditional discrimination training for children with autism spectrum disorder

Children with autism spectrum disorder are typically taught conditional discriminations using a match‐to‐sample arrangement. Consideration should be given to the temporal order in which antecedent stimuli (the sample and comparison stimuli) are presented during match‐to‐sample trials, as various arrangements have been used in the extant literature. The purpose of the current study was to compare the effects of four stimulus presentation orders on the acquisition of auditory–visual conditional discriminations. The study included participants from a clinically relevant population (three children with autism spectrum disorder), employed clinically relevant teaching procedures, and included two presentation formats not included in previous comparison evaluations (simultaneous and sample‐first with re‐presentation conditions). Results were found to be learner‐specific; that is, a different stimulus presentation format was most efficient for each participant. We provide suggestions to evaluate stimulus control topographies and enhance experimental control in match‐to‐sample arrangements.     

Incongruous stimulus pairing and conditional discrimination training: effects on relational responding

In Experiment 1, 5 subjects were exposed to a stimulus-pairing procedure in which two nonsense syllables, identified by a letter-number code as A1 and C2, each predicted the onset of a sexual film clip, and the nonsense syllables A2 and C1 each predicted the onset of a nonsexual film clip. Subjects were then exposed to a matching-to-sample test in which the nonsense syllables A1 and A2 were presented as sample stimuli and C1 and C2 were presented as comparison stimuli and vice versa (i.e., C stimuli as samples and A stimuli as comparisons). All subjects matched A1 with C2 and A2 with C1. Subjects were then trained on the conditional discriminations A1-B1, A2-B2, B1-C1, B2-C2, after which the matching-to-sample test was again administered. All subjects continued to match A1 with C2 and A2 with C1 in accordance with the earlier stimulus-pairing contingencies. An additional 5 subjects were exposed first to conditional discrimination training and testing before being exposed to the incongruous stimulus pairing and matching-to-sample testing. Under these conditions, 4 of the 5 subjects always matched A1 with C1 and A2 with C2. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1, except that a matching-to-sample test was not administered following the initial training procedure. Under these conditions, matching-to-sample test performances were controlled by the contingencies that had immediately preceded the test. Experiment 3 indicated that initial matching-to-sample test performances were unlikely to change, even after repeated exposure to incongruous training and testing. Experiment 4 demonstrated that pretraining with unrelated stimulus sets increased the sensitivity of matching-to-sample test performances to incongruous contingencies when they were similar in format to those arranged during pretraining. These data may have implications for a behavior-analytic interpretation of attitude formation and change.     

Naming in conditional discrimination and stimulus equivalence.

Using a matching-to-sample procedure, McIntire, Cleary, and Thompson (1987) taught monkeys the conditional relations A1-R1-A1-R1, A2-R2-A2-R2, A1-R1-B1-R1, A2-R2-B2-R2, B1-R1-C1-R1, and B2-R2-C2-R2, where the first and third terms in each relation refer to the sample and comparison stimuli, respectively, and the second and last terms refer to the emission of a distinctive pattern of responding. The subjects were then tested for the emergent relations A-C, C-A, B-A, C-B, and B-B, with the differential response produced by a given stimulus during training also emitted on test trials (e.g., A1-R1-C1-R1). The performances of both subjects were as accurate on the tested relations as they had been on the trained relations. The new relations were characterized as demonstrations of stimulus equivalence. However, the conditional discrimination literature shows that such training procedures generate control of comparison selection by the differential response patterns. Therefore, no emergent relations were demonstrated because all of the trained response-stimulus relations were preserved on test trials. This paper suggests that these procedures do not provide an appropriate analogy for the kind of emergent stimulus-stimulus relations exhibited by human subjects in equivalence studies and outlines a paradigm for assessing the relative influence of stimulus-stimulus and response-stimulus relations.