Errorless learning: reinforcement contingencies and stimulus control transfer in delayed prompting.

Delayed prompting can produce errorless discrimination learning. There is inherent in the procedure a disparity in reinforcement density which favors unprompted over prompted responses. We used three schedules of reinforcement to investigate the impact of reinforcement probability on transfer of stimulus control. One schedule of reinforcement was equal prior to and following a prompt (CRF/CRF), the second favored unprompted responses (CRF/FR3), and the third favored responses following the prompt (FR3/CRF). Experimental questions concerned the probability of errors, the probability of transfer, and the rate of transfer in the context of delayed prompting. Transfer was accelerated when reinforcement probability favored anticipatory responding. The schedule that favored prompted responses did not prevent a shift to unprompted responding. Errors were infrequent across procedures. Reinforcement probability contributes to but does not entirely determine transfer of stimulus control from a delayed prompt.

[1]  P. Touchette The effects of graduated stimulus change on the acquisition of a simple discrimination in severely retarded boys. , 1968, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[2]  B. Etzel,et al.  Conditional discrimination after errorless and trial-and-error training. , 1979, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[3]  Cross-modal transfer of stimulus control in the albino rat: A stimulus delay procedure , 1976 .

[4]  M. Rilling,et al.  Stimulus delay and the reduction of errors in the transfer of stimulus control , 1975 .

[5]  S. Striefel,et al.  Acquisition of sign reading by transfer of stimulus control in a retarded deaf girl. , 2008, Journal of mental deficiency research.

[6]  B. Etzel,et al.  The simplest treatment alternative: The law of parsimony applied to choosing appropriate instructional control and errorless-learning procedures for the difficult-to-teach child , 1979, Journal of autism and developmental disorders.

[7]  R. Gaylord-Ross,et al.  Task difficulty and aberrant behavior in severely handicapped students. , 1981, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[8]  B. Hart,et al.  Incidental teaching of language in the preschool. , 1975, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[9]  J. Spradlin,et al.  Establishing a conditional discrimination without direct training: a study of transfer with retarded adolescents. , 1973, American journal of mental deficiency.

[10]  S. Striefel,et al.  Transfer of stimulus control from motor to verbal stimuli. , 1974, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[11]  D M Baer,et al.  An implicit technology of generalization. , 1977, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[12]  C. M. Johnson ERRORLESS LEARNING IN A MULTIHANDICAPPED ADOLESCENT1 , 1977 .

[13]  M. Denny,et al.  Elicitation theory. I. An analysis of two typical learning situations. , 1955, Psychological review.

[14]  J. Halle,et al.  Time delay: a technique to increase language use and facilitate generalization in retarded children. , 1979, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[15]  P. Touchette,et al.  Visual attention in retarded adults: combining stimuli which control incompatible behavior. , 1980, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[16]  H. Terrace,et al.  OF THE EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF BEHAVIOR DISCRIMINATION LEARNING WITH AND WITHOUT " ERRORS " ' , 2005 .

[17]  G. Karlan,et al.  Establishing generalized verb-noun instruction-following skills in retarded children. , 1976, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[18]  E. Carr,et al.  Escape as a factor in the aggressive behavior of two retarded children. , 1980, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[19]  R. Koegel,et al.  Setting generality and stimulus control in autistic children. , 1975, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[20]  S. Bradley-Johnson,et al.  Comparison of delayed prompting and fading for teaching preschoolers easily confused letters & numbers , 1983 .

[21]  S. Hayes,et al.  Alternating treatments design: one strategy for comparing the effects of two treatments in a single subject. , 1979, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[22]  Murray Sidman,et al.  Programming Perception and Learning for Retarded Children , 1966 .

[23]  D. Baer,et al.  Teachers' generalized use of delay as a stimulus control procedure to increase language use in handicapped children. , 1981, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[24]  P. Touchette,et al.  Transfer of stimulus control: measuring the moment of transfer. , 1971, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[25]  M Sidman,et al.  Reading and auditory-visual equivalences. , 1971, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[26]  H. Terrace,et al.  Wavelength Generalization after Discrimination Learning with and without Errors , 1964, Science.