Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-15T14:55:10.766Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Teaching Communication to Learners with Severe Disabilities: Motivation, Response Competition, and Generalisation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2016

Erik Drasgow ,
James W. Halle  and
Jeff Sigafoos
Erik Drasgow*
Affiliation:
University of South Carolina
James W. Halle*
Affiliation:
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Jeff Sigafoos*
Affiliation:
University of Sydney and Children’s Hospital Education Research Institute (CHERI)
*
Correspondence to : Erik Drasgow. Department of Educational Psychology. University of South Carolina. 235-I Wardlaw. Columbia. SC 29208. USA.
James W. Halle, Department of Special Education, University if Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1310 S. Sixth Street. Urbana, IL, 61820-6990, USA.
Jeff Sigafoos, Faculty of Education, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The generalisation of new language targets has been an elusive outcome for learners with severe disabilities. We analyse generalisation and generalisation failures by examining the influence of motivation and response competition, specifically within the context of communication targets serving a requesting function. Our examination includes a discussion of establishing operations (Michael, 1982), fluctuating reinforcer value, the emergence of communicative functions and forms, response competition, and response class phenomena. We end by offering a novel conceptualisation of generalisation with implications for clinical application.

Type
Research Article
Information
Australasian Journal of Special Education , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , 1999 , pp. 47 - 63
Copyright
Copyright © The Australian Association of Special Education 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baer, D. (1982). The imposition of structure on behavior and the demolition of behavior structures. In Howe, H. E. (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 217–254). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Bates, E., Benigni, T., Bremerton, I., Camaioni, L., & Volterra, V. (Eds.). (1979). The emergence of symbols: Cognition and communication in infancy. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bates, E., Camaioni, L., & Volterra, V. (1975). The acquisition of performatives prior to speech. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 21, 205–226.Google Scholar
Billingsley, F., & Neel, R. (1985). Competing behaviors and their effects on skill generalization and maintenance. Analysis and intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 5, 357–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, N. & Halle, J. (1997). Functional analysis of communicative behaviors. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 12, 95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, N. Saunders, K., & Spradlin, J. (1995). A conceptual analysis of request teaching procedures for individuals with severely limited verbal repertoires. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 12, 43–52.Google Scholar
Bryen, D., & Joyce, D. (1985). Language intervention with the severely handicapped: A decade of research. The Journal of Special Education, 19, 7–39.Google Scholar
Carpenter, R., Mastergeorge, A., & Coggins, T. (1983). The acquisition of communicative intentions in infants eight to fifteen months of age. Language and Speech, 26, 101–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carr, E. (1988). Functional equivalence as a mechanism of response generalization. In Horner, R. H., Dunlap, G., & Koegel, R. L. (Eds.), Generalization and maintenance: Life-style changes in applied settings (pp. 221–241). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Carr, E., & Durand, V. (1985). Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 111–126.Google Scholar
Carr, E., & Lindquist, J. (1987). Generalization processes in language acquisition. In Layton, T. L. (Ed.), Language and treatment of autistic and developmentally disordered children (pp. 129–153). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.Google Scholar
Cataldo, M., Ward, E., Russo, D., Riordan, M., & Bennet, D. (1986). Compliance and correlated behavior in children: Effects of contingent and noncontingent reinforcement. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 6, 265–282.Google Scholar
Catania, A. (1963). Concurrent performances: Reinforcement interaction and response independence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6, 253–263.Google Scholar
Catania, A. (1966). Concurrent operants. In Honig, W. K. (Ed.), Operant behavior: Areas of research and application (pp. 213–270). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Catania, A. (1969). Concurrent performances: Inhibition of one response by reinforcement of another. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 731–744.Google Scholar
Catania, A. (1973). Self-inhibiting effects of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 19, 517–526.Google Scholar
Chadsey-Rusch, J., Drasgow, E., Reinoehl, R., Halle, J., & Collet-Klingenberg, L. (1993). Using general-case instruction to teach spontaneous and generalized requests for assistance to learners with severe disabilities. The Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 18, 177–187.Google Scholar
Cirrin, F., & Rowland, C. (1985). Communicative assessment of nonverbal youths with severe/profound mental retardation. Mental Retardation, 23, 52–62.Google Scholar
Davison, M., & McCarthy, D. (1988). The matching law: A research review. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Drasgow, E., & Halle, J. (1995). Teaching social communication to young children with severe disabilities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 15, 164–186.Google Scholar
Drasgow, E., Halle, J., & Ostrosky, M. (1998). Effects of differential reinforcement on the generalization of a replacement mand in three children with severe language delays. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 357–374.Google Scholar
Drasgow, E., Halle, J., Ostrosky, M., & Harbers, H. (1996). Using behavioral indication and functional communication training to establish an initial sign repertoire with a young child with severe disabilities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 16, 500–521.Google Scholar
Drasgow, E., Halle, J., & Phillips, B. (in press). Effects of different social partners on the discriminated requesting of a young child with autism and severe language delays. Research in Developmental Disabilities.Google Scholar
Duker, P., Kraaykamp, M., & Visser, E. (1994). A stimulus control procedure to increase requesting with individuals who are severely/profoundly intellectually disabled. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 38, 177–186.Google Scholar
Egel, A. (1981). Reinforcer variation: Implications for motivating developmentally disabled children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14, 345–350.Google Scholar
Falvey, M. (1986). Community-based curriculum: Instructional strategies for students with severe handicaps. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Ferster, C., & Skinner, B. (1957). Schedules of reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Goetz, L., Gee, K., & Sailor, W. (1985). Using a behavior chain interruption strategy to teach communication skills to students with severe disabilities. The Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 10, 21–30.Google Scholar
Hall, G., & Sundberg, M. (1987). Teaching mands by manipulating conditioned establishing operations. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 5, 41–53.Google Scholar
Halle, J. (1984). Arranging the natural environment to occasion language: Giving severely language-delayed children reasons to communicate. Seminars in Speech and Language, 5, 185–197.Google Scholar
Halle, J., & Spradlin, J. (1993). Identifying stimulus control of challenging behavior. In Reichle, J. & Wacker, D. P. (Eds.), Communicative alternatives to challenging behavior. Integrating functional assessment and intervention strategies (pp. 83–109). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Harding, C., & Golinkoff, R. (1979). The origins of intentional vocalizations in prelinguistic infants. Child Development, 50, 33–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hart, B. (1985). Environmental techniques that may facilitate generalization and acquisition. In Warren, S. F. & Rogers-Warren, A. K. (Eds.), Teaching functional language (pp. 63–88). Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Hemmeter, M., Ault, M., Collins, B., & Meyer, S. (1996). The effects of teacher-implemented language instruction within free time activities. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 31, 203–212.Google Scholar
Herrnstein, R. (1970). On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 243–266.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horner, R., Bellamy, G., & Colvin, G. (1984). Responding in the presence of nontrained stimuli: Implications of generalization error patterns. The Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 9, 287–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horner, R., & Billingsley, F. (1988). The effect of competing behavior on the generalization and maintenance of adaptive behavior in applied settings. In Horner, R. H., Dunlap, G., & Koegel, R. L. (Eds.), Generalization and maintenance: Life-style changes in applied settings (pp. 127–220). Baltimore: MD: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Horner, R., & Day, H. (1991). The effects of response efficiency on functionally equivalent competing behaviors. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 719–732.Google Scholar
Horner, R., Sprague, J., O’Brien, M., & Heathfield, L. (1990). The role of response efficiency in the reduction of problem behaviors through functional equivalence training: A case study. The Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 15, 91–97.Google Scholar
Hupp, S., & Mervis, C. (1981). Development of generalized concepts by severely handicapped students. The Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 6, 14–21.Google Scholar
Hunt, P., Goetz, L., Alwell, M., & Sailor, W. (1986). Using an interrupted behavior chain to teach generalized communication responses. The Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 11, 196–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, W., Pascal, G., & Walker, R. (1958). Deprivation and generalization. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56, 274–277.Google Scholar
Kaczmarek, L. (1990). Teaching spontaneous language to individuals with severe handicaps: A matrix model. The Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 15, 160–169.Google Scholar
Kaiser, A. (2000). Teaching functional communication skills. In Snell, M. E. & Brown, F. (Eds.), Instruction of students with severe disabilities (pp. 453–492). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Keen, D., Sigafoos, J., & Woodyatt, G. (1999). Replacing prelinguistic behaviors with functional communication. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
Kehoe, E., & Macrae, M. (1997). Savings in animal learning: Implications for relapse and maintenance after therapy. Behavior Therapy, 28, 141–155.Google Scholar
Losardo, A., & Bricker, D. (1994). Activity-based intervention and direct instruction: A comparison study. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 98, 744–765.Google Scholar
Mace, F., McCurdy, B., & Quigley, E. (1990). A collateral effect of reward predicted by matching theory. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 197–205.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mace, F., & Roberts, M. (1993). Factors affecting selection of behavioral interventions. In Reichle, J. & Wacker, D. P. (Eds.), Communication alternatives to challenging behavior: Integrating functional assessment and intervention strategies (pp. 113–133). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Mason, S., McGee, G., Farmer-Dougan, V., & Risley, T. (1989). A practical strategy for ongoing reinforcer assessment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 22, 171–179.Google Scholar
McLean, J., McLean, L., Brady, N., & Etter, R. (1991). Communication profiles of two types of gesture using nonverbal persons with severe to profound mental retardation. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 294–308.Google ScholarPubMed
Michael, J. (1982). Distinguishing between the discriminative and motivational functions of stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 149–155.Google Scholar
Michael, J. (1988). Establishing operations and the mand. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 6, 3–9.Google Scholar
Michael, J. (1993). Establishing operations. The Behavior Analyst, 16, 191–206.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newman, J. (1955). Stimulus generalization of an instrumental response as a function of drive strength. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana.Google Scholar
Nozaki, K., & Mochizuki, A. (1995). Assessing choice making of a person with profound disabilities: A preliminary analysis. The Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 20, 196–201.Google Scholar
O’Neill, R., Horner, R., Albin, R., Storey, K., & Sprague, J. (1990). Functional analysis: A practical assessment guide. Sycamore, IL: Sycamore Press.Google Scholar
Ostrosky, M., Drasgow, E., & Halle, J. (1999). “How can I help you get what you want?” A communication strategy for students with severe disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children 31(4), 56–61.Google Scholar
Ostrosky, M., & Kaiser, A. (1991). Preschool classroom environments that promote communication. Teaching Exceptional Children, 23, 6–10.Google Scholar
Reichle, J., Halle, J., & Drasgow, E. (1998). Implementing augmentative communication systems. In Wetherby, A., Warren, S., & Reichle, J. (Eds.) Transitions in prelinguistic communication (pp. 417–436). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Reichle, J., & Sigafoos, J. (1991). Establishing spontaneity and generalization. In Reichle, J., York, J., & Sigafoos, J. (Eds.), Implementing augmentative and alternative communication: Strategies for learners with severe disabilities (pp. 157–171). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Segal, E. (1977). Toward a coherent psychology of language. In Honig, W. K. & Staddon, J. E. R. (Eds.), Handbook of operant behavior (pp. 628–653). NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Shafer, E. (1995). A review of interventions to teach a mand repertoire. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 12, 53–66.Google Scholar
Sigafoos, J., Couzens, D., Pennell, D., Shaw, D., & Dudfield, G. (1995). Discrimination of picture requests for missing items among young children with developmental disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 5, 295–317.Google Scholar
Sigafoos, J., O’Reilly, M., Drasgow, E., Reichle, J. (in press). Strategies to achieve socially acceptable escape and avoidance. To appear in Reichle, J., Beukelman, D., & Light, J. (Eds.), Implementing an augmentative communication system: Exemplary strategies for beginning communicators. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Sigafoos, J., Woodyatt, G., Keen, D., Tait, K., Tucker, M., Roberts-Pennell, D., & Pittendreigh, N. (2000). Identifying potential communicative acts in children with developmental and physical disabilities. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 21, 77–86.Google Scholar
Skinner, B. (1938). The behavior of organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Skinner, B. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Skinner, B. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Sprague, J., & Horner, R. (1992). Covariation within functional response classes: Implications for the treatment of severe problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 735–745.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stokes, T., & Baer, D. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 349–367.Google Scholar
Thomas, D., & King, R. (1959). Stimulus generalization as a function of level of motivation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 323–328.Google Scholar
Webster’s new world dictionary of the American language. (1980). New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Wetherby, A., & Prizant, B. (1989). The expression of communicative intent: Assessment guidelines. Seminars in Speech and Language, 10, 77–91.Google Scholar
Wetherby, A., Warren, S., & Reichle, J. (Eds.). (1998). Transitions in prelinguistic communication. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Yoder, D. (1988). Forward. In Calculator, S. N. & Bedrosian, J. L. (Eds.), Communication and intervention for adults with mental retardation. Boston, MA: College-Hill.Google Scholar