Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A Component Analysis of Skill Acquisition Consequences with Listener Responses

A Component Analysis of Skill Acquisition Consequences with Listener Responses We conducted a component analysis of skill acquisition consequences for correct and incorrect responses. In the learn unit (LU) condition, researchers praised correct responses and implemented a correction procedure contingent on incorrect responses. In the praise-only-for-correct-responses (PC) condition, researchers delivered contingent praise for correct responses and ignored incorrect responses. In the correction-only-for-incorrect-responses (CI) condition, researchers ignored correct responses and implemented the correction procedure contingent on incorrect responses. We manipulated this independent variable across educational and abstract stimuli and measured acquisition rate, duration, and maintenance of responses. The results showed that the LU and the CI conditions were both effective in teaching listener responses and were more effective than the PC procedure. Furthermore, the LU instruction was not necessarily more efficient than the CI condition on acquisition of listener responses. The results suggested that the correction procedure may be necessary and sufficient for skill acquisition and maintenance. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Behavioral Education Springer Journals

A Component Analysis of Skill Acquisition Consequences with Listener Responses

Download PDF
28 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/a-component-analysis-of-skill-acquisition-consequences-with-listener-KJybHgpHi0
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
ISSN
1053-0819
eISSN
1573-3513
DOI
10.1007/s10864-023-09509-5
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

We conducted a component analysis of skill acquisition consequences for correct and incorrect responses. In the learn unit (LU) condition, researchers praised correct responses and implemented a correction procedure contingent on incorrect responses. In the praise-only-for-correct-responses (PC) condition, researchers delivered contingent praise for correct responses and ignored incorrect responses. In the correction-only-for-incorrect-responses (CI) condition, researchers ignored correct responses and implemented the correction procedure contingent on incorrect responses. We manipulated this independent variable across educational and abstract stimuli and measured acquisition rate, duration, and maintenance of responses. The results showed that the LU and the CI conditions were both effective in teaching listener responses and were more effective than the PC procedure. Furthermore, the LU instruction was not necessarily more efficient than the CI condition on acquisition of listener responses. The results suggested that the correction procedure may be necessary and sufficient for skill acquisition and maintenance.

Journal

Journal of Behavioral Education – Springer Journals

Published: Mar 8, 2023

Keywords: Correction procedure; Discrete trial instruction; Learn unit instruction; Praise; Skill acquisition consequence

References

  • Is the three-term contingency trial a predictor of effective instruction?
    Albers, AE; Greer, RD
  • Bad is stronger than good
    Baumeister, RF; Bratslavsky, E; Finkenauer, C; Vohs, KD
  • A comparison of differential reinforcement procedures on the acquisition of tacts in children with autism
    Boudreau, BA; Vladescu, JC; Kodak, TM; Argott, P; Kisamore, AN
  • Comparing skill acquisition under varing onsets of differential reinforcement: A preliminary analysis
    Campanaro, AM; Vladescu, JC; Kodak, T; DeBar, RM; Nippes, KC
  • Equating and assigning targets in the adapted llternating treatments design: Review of special education journals
    Cariveau, T; Helvey, CI; Moseley, TK; Hester, J
  • A review of error correction procedures during instruction for children with developmental disabilities
    Cariveau, T; La Cruz Montilla, A; E., G., & Ball, S.
  • A comparison of error-correction procedures on skill acquisition during discrete-trial instruction
    Carroll, RA; Joachim, BT; St. Peter, C. C., & Robinson, N.
  • Using an abbreviated assessment to identify effective error-correction procedures for individual learners during discrete-trial instruction
    Carroll, RA; Owsiany, J; Cheatham, JM
  • A comparison of the effects of two prompt-fading strategies on skill acquisition in children with autism spectrum disorders
    Cengher, M; Shamoun, K; Moss, P; Roll, D; Feliciano, G; Fienup, DM
  • The role of increased exposure to transfer-of-stimulus-control procedures on the acquisition of intraverbal behavior
    Coon, JT; Miguel, CF
  • Revisiting the role of bad news in maintaining human observing behavior
    Fantino, E; Silberberg, A
  • Is the learn unit a fundamental measure of pedagogy?
    Greer, RD; McDonough, SH
  • A parametric analysis of a protocol to induce Bidirectional Naming: Effects of protocol intensity
    Hotchkiss, RF; Fienup, DM
  • Changes in student and teacher response in observed and generalized settings as a function of supervisor observations
    Ingham, P; Greer, RD
  • Transitioning from rich to lean reinforcement as a form of error correction
    Jessel, J; Ma, S; Spartinos, J; Villanueva, A
  • A comparison of consequences for correct responses during discrete-trial instruction
    Joachim, BT; Carroll, RA
  • An assessment of differential reinforcement procedures for learners with autism spectrum disorder
    Johnson, KA; Vladescu, JC; Kodak, T; Sidener, TM
  • The effects of differential reinforcement of unprompted responding on the skill acquisition of children with autism
    Karsten, AM; Carr, JE
  • Examination of efficacious, efficient, and socially valid error-correction procedures to teach sight words and prepositions to children with autism spectrum disorder
    Kodak, T; Campbell, V; Bergmann, S; LeBlanc, B; Kurtz-Nelson, E; Carveau, T; Haq, S; Zemantic, P; Mahon, J
  • Assessing and training teachers in the generalized use of behavior modification with autistic children
    Koegel, RL; Russo, DC; Rincover, A
  • Comparison of simultaneous prompting and no-no prompting in two-choice discrimination learning with children with autism
    Leaf, J; Sheldon, JB; Sherman, J
  • An analysis of feedback from a behavior analytic perspective
    Mangiapanello, KA; Hemmes, NS
  • An assessment of error-correction procedures for learners with autism
    McGhan, AC; Lerman, DC
  • Fifth graders learn math by observation faster when they observe peers receive corrections
    Neu, AJ; Greer, RD
  • Response repetition as an error-correction procedure for acquisition of math facts and math computation
    Rapp, JT; Marvin, KL; Nystedt, A; Swanson, GJ; Paananen, L; Tabatt, J
  • An analysis of errorcorrection procedures during discrimination training
    Rodgers, TA; Iwata, BA
  • Assessing the efficacy of and preference for positive and corrective feedback
    Simonian, MJ; Brand, D
  • An adapted alternating treatments design for instructional research
    Sindelar, PT; Rosenberg, MS; Wilson, RJ
  • Discrete trial training in the treatment of autism
    Smith, T
  • Error correction in discrimination training for children with autism
    Smith, T; Mruzek, DW; Wheat, LA; Hughes, C
  • A review of recent studies on differential reinforcement during skill acquisition in early intervention
    Vladescu, JC; Kodak, T
  • Component analysis using single-subject experimental designs: A review
    Ward-Horner, J; Sturmey, P
  • Analysis of response repetition as an error-correction strategy during sight-word reading
    Worsdell, AS; Iwata, BA; Dozier, CL; Johnson, AD; Neidert, PL; Thomason, JL