Evaluation of resistance to change under different disrupter conditions in children with autism and severe intellectual disability

Translational research inspired by behavioral momentum theory in the area of developmental disabilities has shown effects in individuals over a range of functioning levels. In the current study, behavioral momentum was assessed in 6 children diagnosed with autism and severe intellectual disability. In a repeated measures design, participants were exposed to relatively rich versus lean reinforcement contingencies in a multiple schedule with food reinforcers. This was followed by exposure to each of four disrupting conditions: prefeeding, presentation of a concurrent alternative stimulus, presentation of a movie, and the presence of a researcher dispensing response-independent reinforcers on a variable-time schedule. Consistently greater resistance to disruption in the component with the richer schedule occurred with the alternative stimulus disrupter but not with the other disrupters. These results suggest parameters that may be more (or less) effective if behavioral momentum inspired techniques are to be exploited in therapeutic environments.     

The establishment of auditory–visual equivalence classes with a go/no-go successive matching-to-sample procedure

The current study evaluated the effectiveness of a go/no-go successive matching-to-sample procedure (S-MTS) to establish auditory–visual equivalence classes with college students. A sample and a comparison were presented, one at a time, in the same location. During training, after an auditory stimulus was presented, a green box appeared in the center of the screen for participants to touch to produce the comparison. Touching the visual comparison that was related to the auditory sample (e.g., A1B1) produced points, while touching or refraining from touching an unrelated comparison (e.g., A1B2) produced no consequences. Following AB/AC training, participants were tested on untrained relations (i.e., BA/CA and BC/CB), as well as tacting and sorting. During BA/CA relations tests, after touching the visual sample, the auditory stimulus was presented along with a white box for participants to respond. During BC/CB relations tests, after touching the visual sample, a visual comparison appeared. Across 2 experiments, all participants met emergence criterion for untrained relations and for sorting. Additionally, 14 out of 24 participants tacted all visual stimuli correctly. Results suggest the auditory–visual S-MTS procedure is an effective alternative to simultaneous MTS for establishing conditional relations and auditory-visual equivalence classes.     

A procedure for generating differential "sample" responding without different exteroceptive stimuli

Sidman (1994, 2000) suggested that responses as well as stimuli can join equivalence classes, a hypothesis difficult to test because differential responding typically requires different stimuli. The present experiments describe a procedure with pigeons that avoids this potential confounding effect. In Experiment 1, spacing two responses 3 s apart (a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate [DRL] schedule) to a white stimulus on some trials produced food or the comparison stimuli in a matching task, whereas pecking 10 or more times with no temporal restrictions (a fixed-ratio [FR] schedule) produced the same effect on other trials. Completing the alternative (unscheduled) requirement terminated the white stimulus and repeated the trial. Following such errors, pigeons learned to switch to the alternative response pattern on the repeat trials. In addition, the correct response pattern functioned as a conditional cue for comparison choice. In Experiment 2, mixed DRL-FR training was preceded by two-sample/two-alternative matching-to-sample with DRL and FR sample-response requirements. In a subsequent transfer test in which the correct response pattern to white served as the sample, pigeons preferentially chose the comparison previously reinforced following that pattern in the baseline task. This "unsignaled response" procedure may be useful for assessing whether differential responses can be members of acquired equivalence classes.