6/8/13 Verbal Behavior and
Language Interventions:
Merging the Evidence
from ABA and SLP!
Trina D. Spencer, PhD, BCBA-D, LBA!
For verbal skills of children with
disabilities to be functional and
effective, their use needs to
become spontaneous(1), to
occur in a variety of nontraining situations(2), include
complex linguistic structures(3),
and to extend beyond directly
taught statements(4).!
Behavior analysts and
speech-language
pathologists have
complementary
expertise and
evidence.!
1 6/8/13 Agenda!
•  Summarize the linguistic perspective of language!
•  Tutorial on Skinner’s analysis of verbal behavior!
•  Introduce notion of “transfer of stimulus control”!
•  Example of research drawing from both Applied
Behavior Analysis and Speech-Language Pathology!
•  General summary of ABA and SLP language
intervention research !
SLP Definition: Language!
•  Humans, unlike animals, communicate complex
thoughts, feelings, and ideas through language.!
•  Language is a code. It is defined as follows:!
•  “Socially shared code or conventional system for
representing concepts through the use of arbitrary
symbols and rule-governed combinations of those
symbols” (Owens, R.E., 2008)!
•  “A code whereby ideas about the world are
represented through a conventional system of
arbitrary signals for communication” (Bloom, 1988)!
Concept
Language!
Linguistic
Encoding
Transmission
Linguistic
Decoding
Concept
2 6/8/13 Key Ideas for Defining Language!
•  Arbitrary symbols (code)!
•  Convention (a mutually agreed upon code by
members of a community)!
•  Rules (how to combine the coded symbols, what
order, what situations)!
•  The number of rules is finite for each language. !
• 
Once these rules are learned, we can produce an
infinite number of expressions (productivity)!
Structure of Language!
Form
Phonology
Morphology
Syntax
Content
Use
Semantics
Pragmatics
Verbal
Behavior!
Behavior that is
reinforced through
another person.!
!
Socially-mediated
behavior.!
3 6/8/13 VB Defined!
Verbal Behavior!
•  I ask you to turn off the light and you turn off the light!
Antecedent - The light is on and I need it off!
Verbal Behavior - “Please turn off the light” !
Consequence - You turn off the light (reinforced through another person)!
!
Not Verbal Behavior!
•  I turn off the light !
Antecedent - The light is on and I need it off!
Behavior - I turn off the light !
Consequence - The light goes off (not reinforced through another person)!
!
!
FORM !
what the behavior looks like!
!
!
FUNCTION !
why the behavior occurs!
!
Same Form Different Function!
Antecedent!
Behavior!
Consequence!
Function!
Wants a
book!
“book”!
Gets a book!
Request
Sees a book!
“book”!
Attention/
praise!
Label !
“What do
you read?”!
“book”!
Attention/
praise!
Answering !
Questions!
MAND!
TACT!
INTRAVERBAL !
4 6/8/13 Plain English Definitions of Basic Verbal Operants
MAND
Asking for reinforcers - things that you want. Saying shoes
because you want shoes.
TACT
Naming or identifying objects, actions, events, etc. Saying
shoes because you see shoes.
INTRAVERBAL
Answering questions or having conversations in which your
words are controlled by other words. Saying shoes when
someone else says, "What do you wear on your feet?"
Motivating Operations (MO)!
•  Antecedent variables that
temporarily alter the reinforcing
effectiveness of consequences!
•  Establishing Operations (increase value)!
•  Abating Operations (decrease value)!
!
Controlling Variables for the MAND
Antecedent
Verbal Behavior
Consequence
(motivating operation)
(mands)
(reinforcement specific to request)
4 hours without water and
salty snacks
says, "water please"
cup of water
room is quiet
signs music
music is turned on
several non-preferred task
demands
says, "all done"
demands stop
wandering the room without
toys
exchanges picture of slinky
gets to have the slinky
5 6/8/13 Controlling Variables for the TACT
Antecedent
Verbal Behavior
Consequence
(non-verbal stimulus)
(tacts)
(generalized reinforcement)
a cup
says, "cup"
approval/attention
sunny outside
points to the sun in PECS
book
approval/attention
stop sign
says, "stop"
approval/attention
a picture of socks
signs socks
approval/attention
Controlling Variables for the INTRAVERBAL
Antecedent
Verbal Behavior
Consequence
(verbal stimulus)
(intraverbals)
(generalized reinforcement)
"E, I, E, I…"
says, "O"
approval/attention
"How old are you?"
points to 6 in PECS book
approval/attention
"Name some animals"
says, "dog, pig, duck"
approval/attention
"On your feet you wear…"
signs socks and shoes
approval/attention
Organization of
Communicative Functions!
Speech-Language Pathology!
• 
• 
• 
Behavior Regulation!
•  Requesting objects/action!
•  Protesting!
Social Interaction!
•  Request social/comfort!
•  Greeting!
•  Calling!
•  Showing off!
Joint Attention!
•  Commenting!
•  Request information!
•  Provide information!
Applied Behavior Analysis!
• 
Mands!
All requests!
•  Showing off / greeting!
•  AMO - B - specific reinforcer!
• 
• 
Tacts!
All commenting!
Providing information!
•  ANV - B - general reinforcer!
• 
• 
• 
Intraverbals!
Verbal exchanges!
AV - B - general reinforcer!
• 
• 
6 6/8/13 !
!
FORM !
SLPs are experts!
!
!
FUNCTION !
Behavior analysts are the experts!
!
Stimulus Control is established
when a response is reinforced
in the presence of an
antecedent stimulus and that
antecedent stimulus reliably
evokes/cues the behavior.!
!
*The STIMULUS is said to CONTROL the response.!
Trial = opportunity for response!
A
N
4 hours w/o water
& salty snacks
-
B
-
“water please”
C
given water
N = Naturally occurring!
7 6/8/13 A
A - B - C
+
N
P
cup of water is put
in front of child but
out of reach
4 hours w/o
water &
salty snacks
given the
water
“water
please”
N = Naturally occurring; P = Programmed prompt!
A
P
-
cup of water is put
in front of child but
out of reach
B
-
“water
please”
C
given the
water
N = Naturally occurring; P = Programmed prompt!
A
N
room is quiet
-
B sign music
C
music gets turned on
N = Naturally occurring!
8 6/8/13 A
A - B - C
+
N
room is
quiet
P
manually
guides hands
to sign music
signs music
music gets
turned on
N = Naturally occurring; P = Programmed prompt!
A
P
-
manually
guides hands
to sign music
B
-
C
music gets
turned on
signs music
N = Naturally occurring; P = Programmed prompt!
A
N
see a cup
-
B
-
says, “cup”
C
attention
& approval
N = Naturally occurring!
9 6/8/13 A
+
N
sees a cup
A - B - C
P
model “cup”
attention
& approval
says, “cup”
N = Naturally occurring; P = Programmed prompt!
A
P
-
model “cup”
B
-
C
attention
& approval
says, “cup”
N = Naturally occurring; P = Programmed prompt!
A
N
“Name some
animals”
-
B
-
says, “dog,
pig, duck”
C
attention
& approval
N = Naturally occurring!
10 6/8/13 A
+
N
“Name some
animals.”
A - B - C
P
shows pictures
of a dog, a pig,
and a duck
attention
& approval
says, “dog,
pig, duck”
N = Naturally occurring; P = Programmed prompt!
A
P
shows pictures
of a dog, a pig,
and a duck
-
B
says, “dog,
pig, duck”
-
C
attention
& approval
N = Naturally occurring; P = Programmed prompt!
The goal of verbal behavior
instruction (and language
intervention) should be to
transfer control from the
programmed stimuli (prompts)
to naturally occurring stimuli.!
!
*Prompting is a teaching procedure to help children make the
correct response until the response has come under the control
of naturally occurring stimuli.!
11 6/8/13 AN
room is
quiet
A
N
room is
quiet
+
AP
-
B
manually guides hands
Transfer
to sign music using full
physical prompting
of
Stimulus
+
AP
Control
manually guides hands to
+
AP
B
-
delaying partial
physical prompting by a
few seconds
room is
quiet
A
N
room is
quiet
-
B
C
music gets
turned on
-
C
signs music
sign music using partial
physical prompting
AN
-
signs music
B
music gets
turned on
-
C
signs music
signs music
-
music gets
turned on
C
music gets
turned on
Using transfer of stimulus
control technology to
promote generalization and
spontaneity of language!
Trina D. Spencer & Thomas S. Higbee, 2012!
Background !
•  Spontaneous: language emitted under the control of
stimuli that occur naturally in the environment as
opposed to stimuli presented or controlled by an adult/
instructor.!
•  Generalized Use: varying trained skills in meaningful
ways and emitting them in a variety of contexts (e.g.,
stimulus and response generalization).!
12 6/8/13 Background!
•  To promote the spontaneous and generalized use of
language in conversation, researchers have systematically
engineered the transfer of stimulus control from
programmed prompts (e.g., scripts) to more natural
features of the context (e.g., activity schedules, toys,
routines, conversation partners, etc). !
•  Script fading following script training is a common
mechanism for accomplishing this transfer.!
Systematic Review of Script
Training Interventions!
Identifying Current Best Evidence!
1.  Appraising Methodological Quality!
2.  Examining Intervention Effect!
3.  Determining the Adequacy of the Evidence!
• 
5 single subject design studies!
• 
3 researchers and locations!
• 
20 different participants!
Spencer, T. D., & Slocum, T. A. (2011). Maximizing conversational independence. !
!EBP briefs: A scholarly forum for guiding evidence-based practices in !
!speech-language pathology, 6(1), 1-8. !
8
EBP Briefs Volume 6, Issue 1 March 2011
Table 1. Summary of Script Training Studies
Accepted Studies
Researchers
Independent
Variable
Setting/Location
Brown, Krantz,
McClannahan, &
Poulson, 2007
3 boys ages
7–13
small classroom;
New Jersey
written scripts
with fading
verbal responses separated
from prior verbal responses
from the conversation partner
19
I = 86%
G = 91%
Krantz &
McClannahan,
1993
3 boys &
1 girl, ages
9–12
school and
research center;
New Jersey
written scripts
with fading
statements or questions
unprompted by an adult
20
I = 97%
M = 75%
Krantz &
McClannahan,
1998
3 boys ages
4–5
classroom;
written scripts
with fading
words said within 1 m of
recipient and separated from
verbal response made by
recipient
19
I = 82%
G = 100%
Matson, Sevin,
Box, Francis &
Sevin, 1993
3 boys ages
4–5
university clinic;
written script on
homes; classroom; visual cue cards
Louisiana
with fading
target phrase within 10-s after
presentation of nonverbal
stimulus cue and before
verbal model
20
I = 96%
G = 100%
M = 100%
Reagon & Higbee,
2009
3 boys ages
3–6
homes; Utah
audio scripts with
fading
unprompted contextually
appropriate statements or
questions
20
I = 83%
G = 89%
M = 95%
Wichnick, Vener,
Keating, &
Poulson, 2010
2 boys &
1 girl, ages
4–6
small classroom;
New York
audio scripts with
fading
word, phrase, sentence or
question independent of
instructor prompts
19
I = 91%
G = 78 %
Participants
Setting/Location
Quality
Score
PND
Sarokoff, Taylor, &
Poulson, 2001
2 children
ages 8–9
classroom,
treatment room,
activity room;
New Jersey
written scripts
with fading
unprompted statements
16
I = 39%
Woods & Poulson,
2006
3 boys ages
5–6
public classroom;
New York
written scripts
without fading
statements or questions
separated from prior
utterances by a change in
topic
18
I = 100%;
G = 100%
New Jersey
Dependent Variable
Quality
Score
Participants
PND
Unacceptable Studies
Researchers
Independent
Variable
Definition of Spontaneous
Note. I = intervention; G = generalization; M = maintenance; PND = percentage of non-overlapping data points
13 6/8/13 Purpose!
To investigate the effect of script training (without script
fading) and generalization procedures on the spontaneous
and generalized use of complex language targets.!
!
!Generalization Procedures
(Applied Behavior Analysis)!
•  Natural contingencies of
reinforcement!
•  Multiple exemplars !
•  Train loosely!
!Complex Language Targets
(Speech-Language Pathology)!
•  Prepositions!
•  Coordinating Conjunctions!
•  Subordinating conjunctions!
•  Train common stimuli!
!
Research Design/Participant!
• 
Fran: 5-year-old female with an ASD!
• 
Fran attended a university-based preschool for children with
ASD.!
• 
Multiple baseline across behaviors!
• 
Prior to the intervention condition, language samples were
gathered while Fran painted with her instructor, her mother,
and a typical peer (baseline).!
• 
The samples were transcribed and analyzed.!
• 
Three classes of language targets were identified.!
• 
• 
• 
Prepositions - with, in, on!
Coordinating Conjunctions - and, but !
Subordinating Conjunctions - because, when!
Setting/Materials!
•  Settings!
•  Fran’s instructional area at the university-based preschool.!
•  Fran’s home at the kitchen table.!
•  Fran’s Kindergarten classroom.!
•  A table and two chairs!
•  Conversation partners sat across from Fran.!
•  Four types of art materials were used during the study.!
•  Color Wonder and Color Wonder paper!
•  Dot paints and art paper!
•  Squeeze paints and art paper!
•  Stamps and art paper (generalization)!
14 6/8/13 Script Sheets!
•  To the left of each line was a picture of the participant
(icon) and between each line was a red circle signaling a
pause.!
•  Each line included a language target !
•  “The colors are pretty on the paper.”!
•  “Your picture is pretty and colorful.”!
•  “It’s messy when it gets on my hands and fingers.”!
•  For each target there were 3 versions-the same phrases
presented in a different order.!
General Procedures!
•  Test sessions preceded training sessions every day.!
•  Fran selected from an array of three art activities (Color
Wonder, Dot paints, & Squeeze paints) before each test
session and each training session.!
•  Three undergraduate instructors worked with Fran during
the study and served as conversation partners during
test and training sessions. !
•  Test sessions lasted 3 minutes.!
•  Training sessions ended when Fran read all five scripts
aloud (about 5 min).!
!
15 6/8/13 Generalization and Maintenance!
•  Three types of stimulus generalization probes were
conducted during baseline and following the intervention.!
•  With Fran’s mother at her home!
•  With typical peers!
•  With materials not used during training!
•  One maintenance probe was conducted after 4 weeks.!
•  With a typical peer in Fran’s Kindergarten classroom.!
Intervention!
1. 
• 
• 
2. 
• 
• 
Script Training!
What to say (language structures)!
Response prompt!
Generalization Training!
Under what conditions should she say it !
How to say it differently with the same effect!
1-Teaching the Script!
•  Before scripts were introduced in the conversation
context while painting, Fran was taught to read the set
of 5 scripts (note cards).!
•  She practiced them until she could read all five lines with
only a few errors and then they were introduced into the
conversation context (usually one day).!
•  Scripts were reviewed outside the conversation context
at least once a day during Fran’s typical instructional
activities.!
16 6/8/13 2- Training Session (Conversation Context)!
•  The session began when the conversation partner put the
materials and script sheet (in a rectangular container) on
the table.!
•  Fran unpacked the script sheet with the materials and
placed it to the side of the table.!
•  A prompter, standing behind Fran, manually guided her to
unpack her script sheet and to use it.!
•  The prompter never spoke.!
2- Training Session (Conversation Context)!
•  Conversation Partner!
•  Placed container on table!
•  Waited for Fran to start the conversation!
•  Spoke naturally, modeled good talking, and replied to and
restated Fran’s comments.!
•  When Fran had read all her lines, said “It’s time to clean up.
Thanks for playing.”!
•  Prompter!
•  Waited 20 seconds for Fran to begin the conversation
independently before prompting the first line.!
•  Once started, waited for 10 seconds of no talking to prompt
Fran toward the next line.!
•  Gently oriented Fran’s head toward partner as needed.!
Test Session Procedures!
• 
The session began when the conversation partner put the
materials (in a rectangular container) on the table.!
• 
Both Fran and the partner unpacked the materials and began
painting.!
• 
The conversation partner did not talk until after Fran began
the conversation.!
• 
The conversation partner was instructed to speak naturally,
model good talking, and reply to or restate anything Fran said. !
• 
After 3 min., the conversation partner said, “It’s time to clean
up. Thanks for playing.”!
• 
Scripts were never present during test sessions—Icons were
introduced for subordinate conjunctions.!
17 6/8/13 Dependent Variable!
•  Each transcription was analyzed for the inclusion of
language targets.!
•  Number of language targets Fran used in 3 min. !
• 
Prepositions!
• 
Coordinating Conjunctions!
• 
Subordinate conjunctions!
•  FYI: Typical SLP measurement strategy.!
Results!
18 6/8/13 Generalization and Maintenance!
•  Three types of stimulus generalization probes were
conducted during baseline and following the intervention.!
•  With Fran’s mother at her home!
•  With typical peers!
•  With materials not used during training!
•  One maintenance probe was conducted after 4 weeks.!
•  With a typical peer in Fran’s Kindergarten classroom.!
Results!
Stimulus Generalization!
19% trained
responses!
22% trained
response!
Results!
Response
Generalization!
84% trained
responses!
19 6/8/13 Results!
Spontaneity Analysis !
29% in
baseline!
86% in
intervention!
Conclusions!
•  Programming for Generalization!
•  Natural maintaining contingencies!
•  Training sufficient exemplars!
•  Train loosely!
•  Program common Stimuli!
!
•  Pairing non-specific discriminative stimuli (icons) with
both the programmed discriminative stimuli (scripts) and
the naturally-occurring stimuli (unspecified dimensions of
context) may enhance the transfer of stimulus control.!
VB Analysis of Conversation!
AN
art materials,
conversation
partner, table
and chairs
Non-verbal
+
AN
conversation
partner talking
-
B
Fran describes
her painting
Verbal
-
C
attention from
conversation
partner
Generalized
Reinforcement
part intraverbal
part tact
20 6/8/13 VB Analysis of Conversation!
AN
art materials,
conversation
partner, table
and chairs
+
AN
-
B
conversation
partner talking
Non-verbal
-
C
attention from
conversation
partner
Fran uses
preposition to
describe her
painting
Verbal
Generalized
Reinforcement
part intraverbal
part tact
AN
art materials,
conversation
partner, table
and chairs
+
AP
ATransfer
N
-
art materials,
conversation
partner, table
and chairs
of
Stimulus
Control
AN
art materials,
conversation
partner, table
and chairs
+
AN
AP
AP
Icon: nonspecific
discriminative
stimulus
AP
Icon: nonspecific
discriminative
stimulus
B
+
B
AP
-
-
C
attention from
conversation
partner
C
attention from
conversation
partner
B
-
Fran uses
preposition
B
-
Fran uses
preposition
AP
-
Fran uses
preposition
Fran uses
preposition
text: it goes on the paper
art materials,
conversation
partner, table
and chairs
Icon: nonspecific
discriminative
stimulus
-
text: it goes on the paper
-
C
attention from
conversation
partner
B
-
C
attention from
conversation
partner
text: Can I use that color
Fran uses
when you are done? subordinating
conjunction
+
AP
Transfer
text:
I like my picture
of
because it is beautiful.
Stimulus
Control
+
AP
AP
-
text: It’s messy when I
get it on my hands.
Icon: nonspecific
discriminative
stimulus
-
B
-
B
Fran uses
subordinating
conjunction
B
-
C
attention from
conversation
partner
Fran uses
subordinating
conjunction
Fran uses
subordinating
conjunction
C
attention from
conversation
partner
-
C
attention from
conversation
partner
C
attention from
conversation
partner
21 6/8/13 AN
art materials,
conversation
partner, table
and chairs
AN
art materials,
conversation
partner, table
and chairs
AN
art materials,
conversation
partner, table
and chairs
+
AP
-
B
-
C
attention from
conversation
partner
Icon: non-specific
Fran uses
discriminative stimulus subordinating
conjunction
+
AP
Transfer
Icon: non-specific
of
discriminative stimulus
Stimulus
Control
+
AN
AP
B
-
B
B
-
Fran uses
Icon: non-specific
discriminative stimulus subordinating
conjunction
art materials,
conversation
partner, table
and chairs
-
-
Fran uses
subordinating
conjunction
C
attention from
conversation
partner
Fran uses
subordinating
conjunction
-
C
attention from
conversation
partner
C
attention from
conversation
partner
Answer!
•  Can stimulus control be transferred from scripts to
more naturally-occurring stimuli in the absence of
formal script fading?!
•  Yes, if you program for it!!
•  Merged knowledge from ABA and SLP to be the
most effective for Fran.!
1.  Spontaneous!
2.  Non-training situations!
3.  Complex linguistic forms!
4.  Beyond trained statements!
GENERAL Summary of Evidence!
Applied Behavior
Analysis!
Speech Language
Pathology!
• 
Young children with autism!
• 
Many systematic reviews of
comprehensive ABA - strong!
Young children with language
impairment!
• 
• 
Thousands of studies on
teaching procedures (DRO,
time delay, self monitoring,
functional assessment)!
Few systematic reviews of
language interventions !
• 
• 
Thousands of studies
describing characteristics of
children with language
disabilities (focus on form)!
22 6/8/13 Recommendations for
Team Decision Making!
•  Every BA needs an SLP buddy (with a password) and
every SLP needs a BA buddy.!
•  Know the other disciplines research, jargon, and
approaches and know your own. !
•  Surrender your ego for the best interest of the child.!
•  Explicitly use the EBP framework as a guide.!
•  Respect and explicitly identify the contributions that
each professional can make to the team.!
•  Use data to drive decisions – Empiricism wins!!
Thank you!!
[email protected]
23 Applied Behavior Analysis and Speech Language Pathology
References
Behavior Analysis Certification Board. (2012). Guidelines: Health Plan Coverage of Applied
Behavior Analysis Treatment for Autism Spectrum Disorder. Available from
http://www.bacb.com/index.php?page=100772.
Bondy, A., & Frost, L. (2006). A common language: Using B. F. Skinner’s verbal behavior for
assessment and treatment of communication disabilities in SLP-ABA. The Journal of
Speech-Language Pathology and Applied Behavior Analysis, 1(2), 103-110.
Cirrin, F. M., & Gillam, R. B. (2008). Language intervention practices for school-age children
with spoken language disorders: A systematic review. Language, Speech, and Hearing
Services in Schools, 39, 110-137.
Gerber, S., Brice, A., Capone, N., Fujiki, M., & Timler, G. (2012). Language use in social
interactions of school-age children with langauge impairments: An evidence-based
systematic review of treatment. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 43,
235-249.
Gillam, S. L., Granpeesheh, D., Tarbox, J., Dixon, D. R. (2009). Applied behavior analytic
interventions for
children with autism: A description and review of research. Annals of Clinical
Psychiatry, 21, 162-173.
Koenig, M. & Gerenser, J. (2006). SLP-ABA: Collaborating to support individuals with
communication impairments. The Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Applied
Behavior Analysis, 1.1, 2-10.
Reichow, B. (2012). Overview of meta-analyses on early intensive behavioral intervention for
young children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders, 42, 512-520.
Spencer, T. D., & Higbee, T. S. (2012). Using script training and transfer of stimulus control
procedures to promote generalization and spontaneity of language. FOCUS on Autism
and Developmental Disabilities, 27(4), 225-236.
Spencer, T. D., & Slocum, T. A. (2011). Maximizing conversational independence using
script training: Generalizing outside the research base. EBP Briefs, 6(1), 1-8.
Spencer, T. D. (Commentary Author) (2010). This review of the efficacy of communicationbased treatments for children with autism spectrum disorders is limited. Evidence-Based
Communication Assessment and Intervention, 4(4), 173-177.
Virues-Ortega, J. (2010). Applied behavior analytic intervention for autism in early childhood:
Meta-analysis, meta-regression and dose-response meta-analysis of multiple outcomes.
Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 387-399.