An operant analysis of the effects of backward chaining and total task presentation

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
An operant analysis of the effects of backward chaining and total task presentation
Physical Description:
xii, 195 leaves : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Spooner, Fred, 1950-
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
People with mental disabilities -- Rehabilitation -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Operant conditioning   ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1980.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 188-193).
Statement of Responsibility:
by Fred Spooner.
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 000099689
notis - AAL5147
oclc - 07093195
System ID:
AA00002197:00001

Full Text







OPERANT


ANALYSIS


OF THE


EFFECTS


BACKWARD


CHAIN ING


AND


TOTAL


TASK


PRESENTATION


FRED


SPOONER


A DISSERTATION


UNIVERSITY


PRESENTED


FLORIDA


GRADUATE


IN PARTIAL


COUNCIL


FULFILLMENT


REQUIREMENT S


FOR


DEGREE


DOCTOR


v-


PHILOSOPHY












ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


The


drafting


acknowledgments


not


as easy


task


may


appear


to be.


imp or tan t


to recognize


those

but a


tha t


Iso


have


those


helped,


who


not


helped


only to

to shape


complete


document,


prerequisite


behaviors


so the


writing


dissertation


could


undertaken.


The


support


and


enc our ag emen t


from


one


s peers


necessary


mainstay


achieving


terminal


oal.


Each


one


them,


his


own


way,


has


helped


some


point


dur ing


doctoral


process


Linda


(Schlosser)


Richie,


Carolyn


B ockhaut,


Carl


Cameron,


Phil


Kalphin,


Carol


Kay,


Ethan


Margolis,


John


Venn,


Skip


erquam,


and


Jon


Saulson.


special


thanks


are extended


those


members


Department


Special


Education


who


were


not


on my


super-


visory


committee


. R.


Reid,


Algozzine


, and


Cary


Reichard.


All


were


most


helpful


direction,


enthusiasm,


and


support.


. Mary


. Dykes,


Chairperson,


Charles


Forgnone,


Stuart


Pennypacker


Schwartz,


were


Philip


members


Clark,


supervi


and


sory


. Henry


committee.


They


were


carefully


picked


ensure


a well


balanced


approach


needs


severely


handicapped


persons.








who


have


contributed


this


document t


and


professional


career.


. G.


would


Thomas


like


Bellamy


thank


Univer


. Marc


sity


Gold


Oregon


, Urbana,


Adl i


Illinois,


Boyd,


Florida


Mental


Health


Institute


and


. R.


Vogelsberg,


University


Vermont.


Their


contributions


have


been


meaning-


this


work.


am personally


indeb ted


following


memb


ers


Sunland


Training


Center


at Gainesville:


Jim


Rast,


. Betty


Horne


Gene


Hendrick s


Liz


Wa 1 tman


E lane


Page,


John


Spencer,


and


Genie


Wilson.


work in


environment


Sunland


Center


was


experimental


site.


Lewis


Webber


and


Doreen


Spooner


are


to be


thanked


for


data


writing


collection.


computer


David


program


Smolen


that


was


aided


responsible


quantita-


tive


analysis.


Their


support t


and


friendship


will


always


valued.


The


photographs


that


are


part


this


sertation


are


work


Richard


Kotarba.


Noel Eeninati and


Doreen


Spooner


were


responsible


photographs


that


were


part


preliminary


drafts


this


document.


LaVelle


Oswalt


typed


both


preliminary


drafts


final


drafts


this


document.


Her


typ ing


ab il ity


and


accountability


meeting


deadlines


s been


greatly


appre-


cited.


Finnl lu


T .rnii 11


liko


tn otv tond


IiVr


An 0-


annroni nfai nfl








Doreen


, my


wife,


have


played


a major


role


arranging


necessary


conditions


them


that


under


which


dedicate


this


document t


document.


was


This


prepared.


s serta-


tion


not


first


contribution


professional


litera-


ture


, nor


last


, but


certainly


best


contribution


to date.

















TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.... .. .. *. .. .. .. ......******* 11 ii

LIST OF TABLES. ...... ... .* .. . . . .. . vl1

LIST OF FIGURES.. .... ... ... a *. -* ** *Vii


ABSTRACT. . .. .. . .


CHAPTER I, INTRODUCTION...........
Statement of the Problem......
Question Under Investigation...
Rationale.. ........ ...... .
Definition of Terms............
Delimitations....... .......
Limitations...................
Summary .....................


4 S t t
. S 4** *
* 4. 4 t
... ... a.. a
* .... ..*. .****...*
....................

...... ...... ......


CHAPTER II, REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE........


Unspecified
Acquisition
Backward Cha
Acquisition
Acquisition
Total Task P
Acquisition
Acquisition
Forward Chai
Acquisition
Acquisition


Procedures. ............
of Vocational Skills....
ining..................
of Self-Help Skills.....
of Vocational Skills....
resentation.............
of Self-Help Skills.....
of Vocational Skills....
ning............. ......
of Self-Help Skills.....
of Vocational Skills....


Comparison of Backward, Forward and
Task Presentation................
Comparisons with Retarded Subjects..
Comparisons with Normal Subjects....
Summary of Related Literature.......


........


........
.......
.........
*.........S
. a....*....




..a.......*


.To....tal
*......5 ...

Total


.....
.....
.....
* a a S .


.......
. ....*








......
S.......a
.....* ..S
.. ...* ..~
*....*...


...........
.........

.... ... ..


CHAPTER III, METHODS AND PROCEDURES


Statement of Hypotheses....
Subj ects. ... ... .. ....
Trainers .... ............
Cn tC +""-tr t


........O.............
... ..........QI O. .
.....................
*~ ~ ~ aI S SI S S 5 4a 4 e
5 *~* S a s ** S* S 5













Timing devices........
Reinforcing stimuli....
Experimental Design.......
Dependent Variables.......
Independent Variables.....
Instrumentation...........
Data Collection...........
Data Analysis.............


CHAPTER IV, RESULTS..........
Hypothesis One..........


Hypothesis Two.....
Summary of Results.


*...C ..C
.......~


..........




........ ..
.... ......

*.t....a....
eta........
* a t .. C t C


*.***.*
S.....
......
*.S....


. ...... ...
.*... at* .t


* .. C CC
* .. ...
* ...... ..
*..........
...........
*.S etc... e.
..... ....


* CS.........tte..


*.*..*. .... c. .....a
*.......C ..t.......

B B


CHAPTER V, DISCUSSION.........
Review of the Literature...


*.ace...
*.C..C...


Review of Hypotheses.......
Review of Methods.................
Summary of Findings...............
Interpretation of the Findings and


Literature Support...........
Problems and Limitations..........
Practical Implications..........
Suggestions for Future Research...
Summary of Future Research........


a.....a....ate .
..............C
*..... C... *....
..............
*.a.*a....... .


* e.e.c....t. ...
........e..c..


.....0.0.......
...........Q..
...BQ.........
e eCS~eC c C*

a ee ac~te a


APPENDICES


A- Subject
B--Subj ect
C- Subject
D -Subject
E--Subject
F- Subject
G -Subject


1. .
2. .
3....
4. ...


6...
I...
4L C C C C




6 .
7f .


H--Subject 8....


*.. a.....
..........
..........
...O.O....
.B.......
...... ..g ..
...B.....
.........


* ta c *t



*...cca .


.B....o....OQ..

......... ......


..............
...... .......**
..et ...... .....

......t...
t C *Sc c sacec

a *a cc C**CS S *


REFERENCE NOTES..... .. .. ...... .. ............. .... 187


REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . 188

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH................. ........ ... .... 194


Page













LIST


TABLES


Table


Procedures used in
severely/profoundly


vocational
retarded


training
persons..


Task


analyst


use


d by


Prill


(1977)


............... 26


Data

Data


collection

collection


form- -drain

form--gate


assembly..


valve


assembly.......


Celerations


inc orr e
indices


for


correc t


responding, and
,r eight subjects


responding,


impr ovemen t
. tt S ..... 5....... *.....


Paee














LIST


FIGURES


Figure


Continuum


deviance


and


comrpetence.............


An example of
or match-to-sa


a conditional
mple problem.


scr imination


Percent of
a function


students


training


trained


to criterion


time


as
... .....


Number
unassi


sted


training


teps completed
probes conduct


(vertical


correctly
d before


intervention


during
and after


line)


on each
. . .. 43


task


segment.


The
and


six
Mora


tasks
les..


used


Patter


son,


Panyan


, Wyatt


Traini

Drain


Gate


ng


tray. .. ........ ..... .. ..........


assembly. . . . . ...............


valve..


... .. .. .... 70


Experimental


de sign


eight


subjects...........


Celeration


family


correct


res


ponding


subj ect


*5* 5*e ** *5 **t 96


Celeration
by subject


family
....t.


for
....*


incorrect t


res


ponding


Improvemen t


Celeration


pair
pair


index


trials


Celeration
pair of tr
pair 2....


&


of
ial


dots


corrects
(TT and


corrects
s (TT and


subject.....


and
BC)
S. *


and
BC)


incorrect
by subject,
. .. a..


incorrect
by subject,
.. ... ..


.... 98


for each
trial


or each
trial


Page










Figure


Celeration


each
trial


pair
pair


corrects and
trials (TT and


incorrects for
BC) by subject,


S. ..... .................... 101


Celeration


each
tiral


pair
pair


corrects


trials


and
and


incorrect tor
BC) by subject,


Page














Council
of the


Ab s trac t
1 of the


Require


Dissertation


University o
tents for the


Presented


Florida
Degree o


Do


to the
Partial
ctor of


Graduate
Fulfillment
Philosophy


AN
BACKWAR


OPERANT ANALYSIS
D CHAINING AND T


OTAL


THE EFFECTS OF
TASK PRESENTATION


Fred


Spooner


August


1980


Chairman
Major De


Mary K
apartment:


Dykes
Special


Education


There


has


been


increasing


interest


acquisition


vocational


skill s


severely


or profoundly


retarded


persons.


Various


inves


tigator


have


successfully


demonstrated


that


severely


and


profoundly


retarded


persons


can


learn


variety


a variety


vocational


settings.


With


adven t


community


placement


restrictive


environment t


all


mentally


retarded


individuals,


question


now


facing


habilitation


specialists


how


most


effectively


and


efficiently


teach


vocational


skills


persons


who


are


severely


or profoundly


retarded.


One


way


actively


answering


this


question


through


an experimental


examination


procedure


for


establishing


ma in ta in ing


stimulus


control


through


use


operant


chain.








three


chaining,

an invest


training

or total


:iga tor


procedures,


task


s choice


backward


presentation.


a particular


chaining,


forward


evident


procedure


that

intrin-


sically


procedure


tied


ha s


to his/her


been


training


empirically


history


proven


date,


to be


no one


superior


other


procedure.


Generally,


investigators


have


suggested


that


backward


superior


or forward


total


or whole


chaining


task


procedures


procedures;


have


however


been


, no


investigator


has


been


able


to demonstrate


superiority


one


method


over


another


vocational


training


tasks.


this


study,


effectiveness


and


efficiency


back-


ward


chaining


procedure


total


task


presentation


pro-


cedure


were


compared.


Subjects


were


randomly


selected


from


a population


severely


and


profoundly


retard


person


s at a state


ins


tuition


retarded


in Florida.


Subjects


were


further


selec ted


using


from


general


following


population


criteria:


institution


range,


years


range,


; (c)


no hand


dexterity,


visual,


or hearing


difficulties


and


no self-mutilating


behaviors.


Eight


subjects


were


subject t


selected


performances


participation


were


evaluated


in

by


the

two


experiment.

means:


trials


to criteria,


and


celebration.


study


was


single


subject


in nature.


La~~~~~~~~~~~~~rn miirn ahl4fl' n0 n 1r4a, eT,41


*I1ntnr-


rnr 11 ti nl


nr r~ ; n n t n


~k


~n rl


Fl nrnnF,


fcA









records


and


distributions


subjects'


response


dura-


tons.


From


analy


results


may


concluded


that


both


celebration


measure


and


trials


to criterion


measure


total


task


procedure


was


superior


back-


ward


chaining


procedure.


All


but


subjects


(i.e.


, Subject


and


Subject


reached


predetermined


criterion


their


respective


task.













CHAPTER


INTRODUCT ION


Over


past


and


a half


decades


there


has


been


increasing


number


investigator s


demon stra tin


success-


vocational


training


g procedures


for


severe


and


pro-


foundly


retarded


person


s (B


ellamy


, Peterson,


ose


, 1975


Clark


1976


Hermelin


Hunter


1955


& Bellamy,


sson,


1976


1967


Loos


Gold,


Tizard,


1972


1955


, 1974,


O'Neill


Bellamy,


1978).


question


to whether


severely


profoundly


retarded


persons


can


taugh t


skills


neces-


sary


to function


independently


shelter


ed vocational


setting


has


not


only


been


answered


affirmative,


but


also


has


been


replicated


across


ta sks,


settings,


and


subjects


numerous


times.


salient


question


now


facing


habilitation


special-


ists


how


to most


efficiently


and


effectively


teach


voca-


tional


skills


persons


who


are


severely


or profoundly


retarded.


Many


investigators


have


suggested


that


one


first


conduct t


steps


thorough


establishing


analy


training


components


program


task


complete


ellamy


et al.,


1975


Close


Irvin


, Prehm


Taylor


, 1978


Gold,


1976


; Spooner


& Reid


, Note










have

and


suggested


verbal


that


direction


shaping,

s are ad


physical


Iditional


priming,

practical


modeling,

techniques


teaching


new


response


topographies.


Stimulus


control


another


area


to be


emphasized


when


one


intere


sted


efficient


and


effective


acquisi-


tion


vocational


profoundly


response


handicapped


(1978)


have


adult


suggested


topographies


and


three


adolescents.


technique


severely


and


Bellamy


s found


effective


improving


stimulus


control.


The


first


tech-


unique


use


differential


reinforcement


(i.e.,


rein-


forcing


appropriate


responses


and


not


reinforcing


inappropri-


ate


late

the


and


response


stimulus


relevant


respond


extinction).


second


features


dimension


task


to which


differentially.


The


technique


order

e must


train


third


technique


to manipu-


to accentuate

attend


another


antecedent


related


method,


involves


gradual


fading


trainer


assistance


investigation


concerned


with


utility


efficient


and


effective


acquisition


complex


vocational


tasks


severely


and


profoundly


retarded


learner s


would


useful


to professionals


who


work


for


vocational


habilitation


this


population.


Such


an investigation


would


also


value


to researchers


tha t


would


help


identify


other


r0 1 cif~rmnt


Aimotc n ci n


Imfla tf ri cnnal


ar nm G-I ^ rnr


curl,


1 nm








Statemen t


Problem


Al though


many


inves


tigators


(Bellamy


et al.,


1975


Bellamy


et al.,


1978


Gold,


1972,


1976


Spooner


Hendrick-


son,


1976)


have


suggested


tha t


varied


stinct


methods


vocational


training


task


analyst


shaping


, phys


ical


priming,


are


ective;


ques


tion


how


to best


teach


vocational


skill


s to


severely


or profoundly


retarded


learners


not


yet


been


answered.


One


way


effectively


answering


this


question


through


an experimental


examination


procedure


establishing


and


ma in ta in ing


stimulus


control


specific


through


d series


use


responses,


an operant


each


chain).


which


chain


associated


with


a unique


stimulus


condition.


With


a chain


each


relevant


stimulus


condition


should


function


ways:


First,


each


discriminative


stimulus


(except


very


last)


should


occasion


sub s e quen t


response


chain


and


second


dary)


each


stimulus


reinforced


for


should


function


previous


as a conditioned


response


ellamy


(secon-


et al.,


1978


elleher,


1966).


training in


issue


then


becomes


how


to best


teach


sequence


responses


most


effectively


so that


dual


function


assoc


iated


stimuli


is established


d and


subse-


quent


responding


free


errors


and


paus


es.


Three


forms


operant


chainin


have


been


used


train in


g severely









forward,


and


a variation


forward,


total


task


see


Table


time


this


investigation


only


one


ves


tigators


has


asked


emperical


question


to which


ese


three


formats


(backward,


forward,


total


task


chaining)


most


efficient


training


programs


concerning


vocational


task s


for


retarded


learners


(Walls,


Zane, & Ellis,

Question Under


press).


Investigation


The


proposed


research


question


under


inve s tiga tion


Which


training


g proc


edures


backward


chaining


total


task


presentation)


mor e


ective


and


effi-


cient


when


severe


or profoundly


retarded


individual


learning


to complete


complex


assembly


tasks.


Rationale


core


an effective


vocational


training


strategy


are


three


society


important t


for


adul


points.

ts is i


First,


.ndependen t


ultimate


living


and


goal


gainful


employment


(Larson


Spreitzer


, 1977


, Morgenstern


& Smith,


1973;


Neff,


1968


, Nirje,


1970


Perske


& Smith,


1977


Rosen,


Clark,


& Kivitz,


1977)


Since


our


capitalistic


society


sanctions


gainful


employment t


for


adult


members


would


seem


reasonable


tha t


society


would


favor


S,


J~~ ~ L. A a -a-,-~ 42 ~ -a aL'- a n ae .1-


~~r\* CI n


L~ ~11U-A


dB. L. A 4B.


i


L. 1Y L:L1


L


J _1 __ A











Table


Procedures used in
severely/profoundly


vocational
retarded


training
persons


Procedure Investigator Tasks


Backward Chaining Bensberg, Caldwell, Dressing
& Cassell (1965)

Breland (1965) Dressing

Bensberg & Slominski Dressing
(1965)

Ball, Seric, & Payne Dressing
(1971)

Minge & Ball (1967) Dressing

Horner (1970) Dressing

Watson (1972) Dressing

Prill (1977) Tool Use

Spooner & Hendrickson Packaging
(1976)

Forward Chaining Hunter & Bellamy Cable harness
(1976) assembly

Modified Forward O'Neill & Bellamy Chain saw
Chain (1978) links

Modified Forward Spooner & Reid Planter
Chain (Note 1) assembly


Total Task
Presentation


Horner
(1975)


& Keilitz


Tooth


brushing


Gold


(1972)


piece


piece
hi r'\rnl


caliper
0 hial r o









Table


Continued


Procedure Investigator Tasks


Total Task Gold (1974) 12 piece
Presentation bicycle brake
assembly

Gold (1976) 14 piece
bicycle brake
assembly

Spooner & Hendrickson
(1976) Packaging

Spooner, Spooner, & Drain
Reid (Note 2) assembly


Not


Specified


Tate


& Baroff


(1967)


Circuit


relay


panel


Levy


(1975)


Circuit


boards


Pomeran tz


(1975)


14 piece
bicycle brake


children


with


Bellamy,
Oliver (


Oliver
n press


Friedenberg
(1977)


Small parts
assembly


& Martin


Foot operated
stapling
machine








Second,


although


American


society


seems


support


sanction


gainful


employment t


all


adul t


persons


, Gold


(1973)


states


that


Retarded
unskilled
mentally
performan


persons
, menial
retarded


have been r
jobs. The
individual


ce in sheltered


legated to m
productivity
. as defined


workshop s


and


undane
of


their


vocational


training programs
is considerably le


uals


doing


similar


throughout


ss than
kinds


that o
of work


United States,
normal individ-
(p. 41, 1973)


retarded


persons


general


have


been


left


to do


menial


tasks


shelter


ed workshops,


severe


or pro-


foundly


retarded


population


ha s


been


, for


practical


purposes


, excluded from participation


work


force


altog


ether


(Spooner


& Hendrick


son,


1976)


. The


behaviors


severe


and


profoundly


retard


persons


have


been


defined


self-abusive,


stereotypic,


and


unproduc tive


onta


Burke


, & York,


1973).


general,


behavior


char-


acteristics


populations


could


described


as deviant,


or as Farber


(1968)


suggests,


incompetent.


What


see


exi


Figure


then


a continuum


Historically,


competence


American


public


and


views


deviance


this


continuum


normal


population


possessing


competence


retard


people


possessing


deviance.


Gold


(1975a)


adds


new


perspective


this


continuum


a hypothesis:


The


more


competence


individual


has,


more


deviance


will


tolerated


him


others.


Said


another


way.


Gold


s Competence--Deviance


HypovDothesis


suzeests




























Deviance


Competence


Figure


Continuum


deviance


and


competence.









vocational


habilitation


severely


or profoundly


retarded


persons,

training.


complex

One w


task s


ay


should


a retarded


chosen


individual


vehicle


can


gain


credibility


among


nonre tarded


members


society


through


learning


complex


tasks.


complex


task


s (bicycle


brakes,


circuit


boards


drain


assemblies)


are


to be


vehicle


training


then


imperative


stimulus s


that


dual


conditioned


function


reinforced)


discriminative


a response


chain


most


tion


effectively


skills


utilized.


necess


It is


to complete


only


complex


through


task s


acquisi-


that


retarded


persons


functioning


levels


will


able


fill


meaningful


positions


industry.


Without


these


skills


retarded


persons


functioning


levels


will


continue


to fill


same


historical


position,


that


surplus


nonproductive


population.


third


point


vocational


training


severely


or profoundly


retarded


learners


can


identified


problems


in response


topography


and


problems


stimulus


quence


control;


responses


training


most


issue


effectively


how


(Bellamy


teach


et al.,


se-


1978).


Implicit


third


point


potential


problems


both


response


topography


s t imulu s


control


minimized


a procedure


which


makes


better


use


dual


function










Definition


Terms


The


following


definitions


are


intended d


to facilitate


and


clarify


communication


purpose


proposed


study.


Severely


or profoundly


mentally


retarded


Those


individuals


whose


intellectual


functioning


falls


below


four


standard


deviations


from


mean


as measured


on a Stanford-


Binet


Total


task


procedure:


training


procedure


utilizing


a forward


practice


progression


ed during


format


every


which


session.


every


Through


step


use


task


such


a procedure


errors


drop-out


over


time;


each


individual


step


does


not


need


to be


brought


an a prior


criterion


before


movin


nex t


step.


Backward


chaining


chaining


procedure


which


last


step


task


trained


first.


trainee


learns


last


step


an a prior


criterion,


then


next


last


step


linked


last


step


and


trainee


performs


last


steps


task.


progression


made


sequence


respond


ses


reverse


(back-


ward)


order


until


whole


chain


responses


task


acquired.


backward


chaining,


reinforcement


comes


end


task


first


step


trained


(last


ofa atn 4-ha 4-f a iCnna4hn rg nofan ai a nn


f-I- an


dn~


t~ nlr \


n 4 n F nrn n


tk n~r


+ n :n F nv r\ n


atnnb


*T-T #-


~y









Complex


task


complex


task


assembly


considered


one


which


a retarded


individual


requires


individualized


and


extensive


training


order


to perform


required


join-


ings.


Discriminative


stimulus


A discriminative


stimulus


timulus


ose


presence


opera t


b ehavi or


highly


probable


because


behavior


has


previously


been


reinforced


essence


tha t


stimulus.


Conditioned


reinforced


conditioned


reinforced


a positive


rate


change


stimulus


that


becomes


reinforcing


behavior


because


assoc


nation


with


reinforcement


previous


experience


organism.


Del imitations


The


Health


delimiting


and


factors


Rehabilitation


this


service


study


were:


Administration


State


Florida


Sunland


Center


, Gainesville,


Florida


a bath


house


tha t


was


converted


training


site;


bath


house


was


without


electricity


and


therefore


had


no electric


lights


conditioning,


or heat.


use


severe


and


profoundly


retard


institutionalized


individuals


subj


ects


was


another


delimiting


factor.


Limitations


The


only


factor


which


may


limit


study


would


factor


time.


time


cons


trains


placed


study,









Summary


Investigator s


training


have


procedures


established


severely


successful


or profoundly


vocational


retarded


persons.


imperative


that


next


step


initiated


to examine


which


tra in ing


procedures


vocational


tasks


are


most


effective


with


this


population.


Problems


vocational


training


severely


handicap


persons


can


summarized


topography


into


and


cate


gories.


problems


Problems


stimulus


control


response


(Bellamy


al .,


1978).


One


solution


evaluation


proposed


tra in ing


question


procedures


is an empirical


backward


chaining,


total


behavioral


task


discipline


presentation.


and


Researchers


vocational


from


habilitation


operant


sci-


pline


have


not


address


question


posed


this


investi-


gator


, the


purpose


this


investigation


answer


that


question.













CHAPTER


REVIEW


RELATED


L LITERATURE


The


following


review


divided


into


several


sections.


first


section


are


studies


which


procedures


are


and


not


total


firmly


task


delineated


and


presentation


which


are


backward


reviewed.


chaining


nex t


sec-


tion


are


studies


which


investigator s


used


a forward


cha in ing


procedure.


Located


last


section


are


studies


which


investigators


made


comparison s


among


backward


and


forward


chainin g


as well


total


task


presentation.


Unspecified


Procedures


technology


training


g procedures


used


when


learners


who

help


are

and


severely or

vocational


profoundly


skills


retarded


still


are

its


acquiring

infancy.


self-

Some


inves tiga tor s


have


sugg


ested


that


self-help


skill


s should


taugh t


prior


vocational


skill


for


reasons.


teaching


self-h


skills


to solve


staff


problems.


The


second


reason


normal


development,


children


(Haring


acquire


& Pious


self-help


, 1976


skill


Perske


prior


& Smith,


to vocational


1977).


skills


Self-h


skills


will


included


review


as an area


which


C .tive


tra in in


onr no Pdur P


have


been


uls ad


wi th


spvperP. V









past


present,


(i.e.,


late


as early


as 1977,


as 1955)


firmly


and


delineated


even


procedures


were


not


prime


necessity.


What


was


prime


importance


shown


studies


reported


this


section


(e.g.,


Loos


& Tizard,


1955;


Pomerantz,


1975)


was


that


procedures


were


developed


which


worked.


almost


cases,


when


investigation s


have


been


concerned


with


acqui


sition


self-help


skills


severely


or profoundly


retarded


learners,


possible


tell


which


procedure


being


used


, Azrin,


Schaeffer,


& We


1967)


solowski,


This


1976;


not


Bensberg


case


et al.,


with


1965;


procedures


Minge


used


& Ball


train


vocational


tasks.


Acquisition


Vocational


Skills


one


first


classic


studies


vocational


hab il itation


retarded


persons


range


24-41),


Loos


and


Tizard


(1955)


trained


S iX


retarded


males


to fold


cake


boxes.

No
the
and


group


The


vocational


unusual



boys we
coached
p then


training


techniques
tre first s
singly fo
worked und


the experimenter
patient failed t
the correct orde


go through
correctly.


for
o do
r he


the whole
(P. 397)


hown


involved


training.


how


about


to do


an hou:


er the supervit
a fortnight. I


the
was


correc t
made to


sequence


was:

* .Rather
the job
r. The
sion of


When


things
begin


a
in
and


movement


L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C t% fln 1%- 4- -4 r3 d --- r 4 t -,t


^ n, n -4--- -4


I


lr


I


1\ n n~ A~rn


nnnnrmC


AU I~II* ~~ ~I


rlrr n








another


study,


Pomerantz


(1975)


spoke


extending


Gold'


(1972)


training


philosophy


training


a com-


plex


assembly


task


(i.e.,


bicycle


brake)


to severely


retarded


children


ages


and


years.


Although


Gold


training


philosophy


task


analysis


was


followed,


there


was


no mention


specific


format


(i.e.,


backward


chaining,


forward


chaining,


or total


task


presentation)


used


to facilitate


acquisition.


In regard


techniques


used,


P omeran tz


stated.


The
have
tion
ever


techni
been
Theor


dustrial
applied.


ques stores
powerfully
v of Zeama


behavior


analy


engineering
(p. 4)


stimul
influen


n


and


sis
and


Ho


and


us control a
.ced by the A
,use (1963).
methods from


ergonomic s


are


nd
tten-
How-
in-
also


Two


major


questions


Pomerantz


study


were:


First,

bicycle


were s

brake


teps (

analy


content


8)-s


task


appropria


analysis)

te for ef


f icien t


original

training


with


a population


severely


retarded


children?


Second,


young


trainable


children


have


degree


motor


control


needed


manipulations


demanded


a breakdown


that


was


prepared


older


individuals?


The


tended


research


a compare


questions


son


asked


training


Pomerantz


formats.


were


not


Pomerantz


was


primarily


interest ted


asking


relevan t


ques


tions


nature


content


task


analy


and


application


generaliza tion


acquis


ition


akill


a different









severely


retarded


persons.


They


focused


on procedures


which


used


modeling,


priming


and


match-to-sample


cues.


Gold


(1975b)


described


match-to-sample


procedures


fitting


into


a category


single


pieces


learning.


That


case


sample


three


stimuli


stimuli


are


and


same


a matching


and


stimulus


other


stimuli


are


size).


sample


to Gold,


different


The


(see


were


question


Figure


different


.some i

became,


Single


from


-espect

which


pieces


a category


, color,


stimulus


learning


multiple


shape,


matched


, according


pieces


learning


(chained


learning).


Gold


has


suggest d


that


these


single


pieces


match-to-sample)


were


later


plugged


into


a chain


responses


(i.e.,


multiple


pieces


learning),


enab1 ing


learner


to complete


task.


For


example,


assembly


electronic


circuit


boards,


initial


problem


was


which


part


was


correct


part


(match-to-sample).


After


having


picked


right


part


problem


became


how


to get


that


part


securely


sitioned


board


(multiple


pieces


learning).


That


pick


part


bend


leads


, insert,


turn


head


bend


leads


along


back


side


board,


and


crimp.


The


last


sequence,


pick


part


bend


leads


, etc.,


was


series


stimuli


and


re-


spon


ses


being


held


together


discriminative


stimuli


and


conditioned


reinforcers.













































Figure


examp le


a conditional


discrimination


or match-to-sample


problem.








regarding


responses


match-to-sample


required


cues


to complete


and


task


total


chain


successfully.


-They


described


procedure


as follows


A ta
'I
with
in f


sk


was


name


ront


responded


given
to th


esented


make


experimenter
of the left-
correctly,


same


right-hand


with t]
it look


like


pointing
hand bin.


was


instructions


bin.


When


praise
with a
both


truc tion
this, "


the s
the
d and


ample
subject
then


gesture
items ha


d


been correctly
reinforced with


Responses
reinforce
faced to


subject


w


correctly


positioned,


both


to initial


d


praise
tasks


on a continuous


an intermittent
as generally at
. (p. 130)


the subject
and edible
of a session
basis. This
hedule after


tending


and


was
treats.
were
was
the


performing


The


tra in ing


paradigm


for


multiple


pieces


learning,


into


which


this


match-to- sample


part


fit,


was


not


described


sufficient


enough


detail


process


to be


fully


delineated.


From


a review


Bellamy


et al


.'s (in


press)


results


it can

could


concluded


follow


that


generally


used


severely

vocational


retard


training


trainees


cues


modeling,


priming,


and


match-to-sample.


Al though


teach-


procedures


described


Bellamy


et al.


ess


were


effective


developing


sample-matching


operation


question


still


remain s


most


efficient


method


teaching


and


similar


operations.


In a fourth


study


, Friedenberg


and


Martin


(1977)


tested


Gold


's (1973)


these


that


pay


or praise


some


form


were









stapling


were


used.


The


first


used


was


a machine


method


which


required


operating


a foot


pedal.


The


second


method


was


a hand


me thod.


The


trainees


were


severely


retarded


male


adults


and


, respectively)


judged


not


ready


work


sheltered


workshop.


tr a ining


procedure e


used


Friedenb erg


and


Martin,


was


not


clear


how


operants


response


chain


stapling


were


introduced


(i.e.,


backward


chaining


, etc.).


They


stated:


The t
steps
while


trainer
neces


be
sar


stating


performing
(p. 17)


Further


ace


was


gan by phys
y to obtain
verbally th


wording


ically modeling the
a completed product


e


to the


apparent


from


operations
task analy


a review


was


article


that


a level


least


prompts


similar


that


used


Brierton,


Grimm,


and


McCarthy


(Note


was


used


to correct


errors.


From


an examination


res


ults


section


Friedenberg


and


Martin


s study,


can


concluded


tha t


training


procedures


were


success


ful.


The


investigator s


raised


ques-


tions


concern in


a high


unacceptable


rate


seen


production


after


errorless


performance


had


een


reach


ed in


training.


criterion


acquisition


used


Fri


edenberg


and


Martin


study


was


consecutive


correct


trials


consid


erably


higher


than


criterion


used


Gold


(1972,


1976),


consecutive


correct


performances


From


high


unacceptable










may


have


been


low


compared


that


longer-cycle


assembly


tasks


with


an impressive


"mechanical"


look


Studi


that


have


een


categoriz


unspecified


section


have


been


placed


section


since


was


unclear


to what


procedure


was


used


during


task


acqui


ition


process


Nonethel


ess


investigators


were


success


meeting


objectives


their


propo


studies


Loos


and


zard


s (1955)


class


study


was


effective,


but


was


not


clear


to which


procedure


was


use


Other


present


inve


knowled


stigator

ee with


have


extended


regard


training


body


severely


or profoundly


retarded


ersons


, Pomerantz);


yet


exac t


inve


tigation


written


could


not


replicated


lack


inclus


specific


proce


dures


training.


There


are


oss


answers


why


specific


procedures


have


not


been


delineated.


First


, early


inves tiga tor s


Loos


and


Tizard)


were


primarily


interest


subjects


performing


task


sequence


correctly


Second,


later


inve


stigations


, Bellamy


et al


in press


; Friedenberg


Martin,


1977


P oamerant


, 1975)


investigators


research


ques


tions


were


not


phra


sed


to make


procedure


salient


manipulated


variabless.


u








last


now


individual


performs


last


steps


and


reinforcement


immediately


follows.


links


operant


chain


are


added


this


reverse


mann er


until,


finally,


person


can


execute


whole


chain


behavior s


success-


fully.


use


backward


chaining


been


documented


literature


at least


years.


Skinner


(1938)


explained


process


At th
rat i
the t
Inves
box,
soon
tray
ments
tion
box a
Such
are m


e
s
:ra


beginning
placed in


y


sev


tiga tory


adap


tray,
t out


contains
made by
from the


re


an experiment t


the
*eral


experiment t


periods


responses to
and so on,
to a fairly


food,
the r
tray


reinforced


movements


iade


hungry
operant
less th
be writ
The cha


with


rat.
. the


or oughly
ten SSD:


in


the
are
low


however,


.at
and
by


adjace
he act


become fully
considerable


mne respond
nature of


bo


a hungry
x containing


r, say
walls
elicit


one
of
ed.


strength


and cert
presence
nt parts
ions of


a in
of
of
S:


conditioned


fr


se is
which


investigated
tray. F: ap


stands


hour


the
but
The
move-
stimula-
the
food.
and


equency by a
a discriminated
will be more or


later.


proa


point as


t may
tray.


follows:


: tray,


next


which


only w
by the


h


establi
1r\


h S
en
sou


approach


step i
shmen t


food.


building up
of a "remote"


SU: tray, R: app
a discriminative
nd of the food m


roach, is
stimulus


aga zne


seizing


e total sample
discrimination,
reinforced
applied


pre


sented.


53)


Skinner


used


an additional


element,


magazine


training,


process


conditioning.


Often


this


procedure


has


been


omitted


modern


researchers


and


practitioners.


Magazine









sequence


which


food


used


as a reinforced,


first


food


established


increases


humans,


as a reinforced


presence


especially,


(i.e.,


rate


stimulus).


reinforcing


stimulus


responding


the

may


training

not


always


stimulus


while


Through


immediately


cue


follow


, a click)


reinforcing


this


stimulus


pairing


response


needs


therefore,


to follow


(food)


click


being


with


a bridging


response,


delivered.


food


close


temporal


proximity,


said


that


click


takes


on reinforcing


properties


The


click


first


conditioned


reinforced


chain.


The


process


conditioning


human s


and


other


organisms


similar


and


proceeds


reverse


(backward)


order.


Many


inves tigators


have


sugg


ested


use


backward


chaining


Ferster


procedures


& Perott,


(Bigelow


1968;


Favell


Gilbert,


& Gibby


Bigelow


1974


stated


that,


Chaining techniques
which normally occur


The distinguishing
activities is that
That is. the last


step


sequen


s


are
in


used to
a fixed


charqacteri
the task is
ted of the


ce is


taught


st


teach
order
ic of


tau
task
fir


behaviors


or sequence.
chained
backwards.


or last
t. (197


Another


researcher,


Gardner


(1971)


reported


that,


developing


a complex


chain


behavior,


frequently


desirable


to begin


backwards


and


provide


reinforcement


St -


. 31)


I









components


which


occur


nearest


primary


reinforced


are


strengthened


first.


From


a review


literature,


evident


that


backward


chaining


effective


with


animals


and


humans


several


always


reasons.


First,


reinforced.


organism


Second,


through


s terminal


response


conditioning


pro-


cess


other


stimuli


are


reinforcing


organism.


Third,


strength


backward


chaining


establishment


firm


conditioned


reinforcers


which


turn


as discrim-


native


stimuli


next


step


chain.


Acquisition


Self-Help


Skills


According


Azrin


and


his


co-worker s


(Azrin


et al.


1976)


a majority


inves tigators


have


used


a backward


chaining


procedure


teach


dressing


skills


to severely


and


profoundly


retarded


learners.


Azrin


et aL


continue


stating:


Almost all
procedures


serve


give
off
stru
a gi
for
puts

Two


n at


these
common


reports
Food


reinforcers;
completion c


or putting on a specify
action is given to star
ven garment; "backward


e


ach garment
on or takes


sets


whereby
off the


investigators


have t
snacks


e following
or praise


reinforcement


act


ic


t


garment;


each trial
chaining" i


instructor


garment

, Ball


taking
an in-
for


used
himself


entirely. (p.

et al. (1971),


Minge


and


Ball


(1967),


have


modeled


training


proce-


dures


after


Breland-Colwell


program


(Bensberg,


1965).


danAn r


EinnaRr a? mA


rhnr r h ok


Snl'T C\l a


Iu In rrr -


.a I' t' rf -


29)

and


v


I
tr ~1 n 1 n n


1








Breland


stated


that


training


process


begins


with


reward


training.


That


free


reinforcers


are


g iven,


which


essentially


Next,


magazine


individual


tra in ing


taugh t


animal


to follow


literature.


commands


come


here


command


After


"come-here,


individual


" the


command d


has


"sit


mastered


down"


obeying


added


only


after


here


are


other


learned


responses


that


"sit


terminal


down,


response,


"come


undressing,


added


chain


already


established


behavior.


Watson


(1972)


recommend


use


backward


chaining


to teach

learners


dres


sing


also.


For


skills


to severely


example,


and

task


profoundly


dressing


retarded


one


self,


Watson


reported


that


some


learners


there


could


five


steps


to dressing


The


steps


were:


Put

Put

Put


on underpants.

on pants.

on shirt.


Put


on socks


and


Put


on shoes.


The


trainer


would


in by


helping


child


on with


every-


thing


but


his/her


shoes


Next,


trainer


would


say,


"get


dres


sed,


" have


child


put


on his/her


shoes,


and


reinforce


child


with


an edible.


During


nex t


trial,


trainer


would


help


child












would


one


less


step


and


required


child


to complete


one


more


step


combination


with


steps


learner


had


already


demonstrated.


can


served


through


Watson


example


that


dressing


was


taught


through


use


backward


chaining.


Acquisition


Vocational


Skills


Two


investigators,


Prill,


1977


and


Spooner


and


Hendrick-


son,


1976,


have


reported


use


a backward


chain in


proc


edure


teach


acquisition


complex


vocational


skill s


to profoundly


retarded


subj


ects.


Al though


Prill


did


not


spec


ifically


spell


out


narrative


that


backward


chaining


was


use


from


observation


task


analysis


(Prill,


procedure


Table


was


use


can


conclude


in acquisition


that


a backward


skills


tool


chaining


use.


Spooner


and


indicate


Hendrickson,


proc


edures


other


used


hand,


task


ecifically


packaging


merchandi


(the


use


total


task


procedure


will


discussed


another


section).


They


stated:


By
ski:
was


"backward c
11 each time


met


hait
a


ning" the
specified


subject


to apprehend more
at any one time,
responsibility fo


was


than
while


re


subject's a
performance
lived of h


a single
still re
complete


piece


acquired
criterion
having
of learning


training t
d product


Both


investigators


have


reported


favorable


acquisition


their


respective


tasks


with


learners


classed


as profoundly











Table


Task


analysis


used


Prill


(1977).


Raise
Place


hand


ra


Place so
Separate
Hold rat


Pick u
Place
Rotate


nu


tchet
cket


ratchet


chet


ratchet
t in bi


nut


holder--peg
box


and
one
in o


down


socket


hand--


ne


socket


hand- -socket


counter-clockwise


other
in other


direction


until


bolt


Pinch


Reach
Place
Lift r
Turn r
Hold w
Rotate
Place
Lift r
Rotate
Place
Hold s


Pick


r grasp
for nut
ratchet
atchet &
atchet b
ood base


and


dep


nut


socket


socket
ack & forth
with left
ress until


end


starred
atche t


& depress


ratchet
ocket w


on side


until
hand
socket


socke t


over


j ig


teeth


no longer


sound


fits
nut


socket


ratchet


over s
ith fre


ratchet--peg


U


quare
e hand
end d


until
hole


fits
in s


into


socket


ocket


own


Reach
If no
If soc
Rotate
Place
Pick u
Pinche
Reach
Orient


for


ratchet


turn place


ket
wit


turns
h hand


starred


socket


place


end


over


in front


aside--return


task
to ste


on dot
D 2


nut


socket


r gr
for


asp


socket


largest
task


socket


N
eraliz


. M.


Adults


ote.


ed Tool
Prill,
(Vol.


From


1'v u tio


Use Skills
Habilitation
2), 1977, Sp


a Proc


Severely


of Severely
ecialized Tr


edure for Teaching Gen-
Retarded Person" by
and Profoundly Retarded


a in ing


Program.


Reprinted


permission


with


n


e









Other


investigators


., Screven,


Straka,


& LaFond,


1971)


have


also


reported


use


backward


chaining


pro-


cedures


to develop


vocational


skill


s in


mentally


retarded


persons


Screven,


et al.


sugg


ested


tha t


their


procedures


are


derived


Skinner


and


from


his


operant


associates.


me thodol o


Skinner


associated


(1969)


with


emphasized


pliability


behavior


tha t


idea


tha t


most


definable


behaviors


can


mod if i


ed by


manipulation


ecific


einforcer


environmental


s" and


consequences


punisherr s


behavior


Schedules


such


reinforce-


men t


are


also


important t


environmental


contingency


that


an individual'


quences


Se.e


s behavior


reinforcers


is correlated


or punishers)


with


through


conse-

use


schedule


es.


creven


et al.


worked


with


a client


population


Milwaukee


, Wisconsin


, of


males


females


between


ages


year


They


reported


that


s of


this


population


ranged


from


not


measurable


(profoundly


mentally


retarded)


to approximately


educable


mentally


retarded).


The


workshop


was


an automated


setting


Prior


actual


participation


automa ted


workshop,


each


client


was


individually


trained.


Backward


chaining


was


pro-


cedure


choice.









responses
. In


at
this


ny point
backward


are


highly


chaining


likely.


procedure,


the c
chain


lient


completes


at first,


so on backward


step
et al


the
1971


then
until


chain from
, p. 329)


only


final


final


mus
the


t


carry


part
out


beginning.


the
s, and
each


(Screven


The


investigators


not


present


acquisition


data;


however,


they


did


present


production


data.


Therefore,


can


assumed


that


backward


chaining


procedure


wa s


effective,


tha t


clients


were


able


to produce


error-


less


products


It has


already


been


noted


that


operant


researchers


have


used


backward


cha in ing


training


experimental


organisms.


Al though


Skinner


stressed


that


magazine


training


place


to begin


backward


chaining


process


, many


modern


operant


practitioners


have


negl


ected


to initiate


backward


chaining


procedure


with


human


subjects


a similar


fashion


used


with


other


experimental


organisms


From


chaining


a review


procedures,


literature,


evident


with


that


regard


backward


to backward


chaining


has


been


found


to be


effective


training


both


self-


help


and


vocational


skills


seven


rely


and


profoundly


retarded


learners.


It should


further


indicated,


that


strength


backward


chaining


establishment


firm


condi-


tioned


reinforcers


which


turn


act


discriminative


stimuli


next


step


chain.









and


Inman


(1979)


suggested


tha t


total


task


presentation


a variation


a forward


chaining


procedure.


Gold


(1976)


state


tha t


total


task


presentation,


every


step


task


practiced


every


time.


Err or s


and


assistance


from


trainer


drop-out


over


time.


maj or


difference


between


total


task


and


forward


chainin


tha t


although


both


train in


g sequences


begin


with


not


first


contingent


step,


upon


total


acqui


task


, access


sition


ece


one


ding


step


step.


Bellamy


et al.


(1979)


stated


that,


"this


[total


task


pre-


sensation]


appears


to have


advantage


maximi


learner


s independence


early


training


ecially


some


step


are


already


familiar


individual]"


(1979


, p


33).


Investigators


using


total


task


procedure


have


found


to be


an effective


tra in in


technique


with


severely


and


pro-


foundly


retarded


learners


as have


investigator s


using


backward


cha in ing


procedure


training.


Acquisition


Self-Help


Skills


There


exis


ts at least


one


inve s tiga tor s


(Horner


& Keilitz,


1975)


tha t


have


success


fully


employed


total


task


procedure


to develop


self-h


skills


retard


ed ado-


lescents.


self-help


task used


was


toothbrushing.


Althou


complete


h Horner


and


detail.


Keilitz


can


s procedure


inferr


that


%,


was

total


not

tas.


specified

k nre-


.-..


. L.


LJ %._








were


given


opportunity


to perform


last


step"


(1975,


304).


From


a review


discus


sion


section


Homer


and


Keilitz


subjects


s article


achieved


can


a high


concluded


criterion


that


performance


eight


standard


to 30


made


training


significant


sess


gains


ions.


over


The


their


remaining


baseline


subjects


performance.


While


set


not

the


reaching

study,


the

the


stringent t


standard


performance

toothbrushi


requirements

na behaviors


acquired


subjects


would


more


than


likely


s tinguishable


from


that


noninstitutionalized


per


sons.


Homer


and


Keilitz


s results


cannot


attributed


simply


to practice


passage


time.


can


observed


that


from


use


a multiple


baseline


procedure


subjects


' performance


did


not


change


appreciably


until


tra in-


ing


was


initiated.


Acquisition


Vocational


Skills


Two


group s


investigators


studies


have


docu-


mented


effective


application


total


task


procedures


acqui


sition


complex


vocational


skills


(Gold,


1972,


1974,


1976;


Gold


& Barclay,


1973


Spooner


& Hendrickson,


1976


Spooner


et al


Note


Gold


did


not


indicate


spe-


cifically


that


total


task


procedure


was


used;


however,


personal


communication


(Note


reported


that


total


task









Gold,


like


most


investigator s


this


review,


was


not


interested


comparing


or more


procedures


their


effect t


on rate


skill


acquis


ition.


Instead,


Gold


was


interested,


initially,


transference


learning,


ectiveness


redundant


stimulus


factors


rate


learning


retention


learning.


In Gold


s (197


study


moderately


and


severely


retarded


individuals


were


train


to assemble


a 15


piece


bicycle


brake


assembly


task.


One


half


subjects


worked


with


parts


training


task


brake


they


came


from


factory


(form-only)


The


other


learn


ers


worked


with


parts


tha t


were


color


coded


(color-form).


Gold


stated


that,


"coding


consisted


painting


surface


each


part


that


facing


subj


ect


when


placed


proper


position


assembly"


517)


Both


group


s of


learners


., form-only


and


color-form)


were


train


ed by


total


task


approach.


acquisition


transfer


studies


, the


independent


variables


were


number


relevant


dimensions


(form-only


or color-form)


amoun t


learning


(criterion


or overlearning).


Learning


was


defined


as a criterion


performance


correct


out


eight


consecutive


trials.


Overlearning


was


specified


trials


beyond


criterion.


There


were


three


dependent


variables


study.


These


include


trials


to criterion,


manipulation









access


bicycle


brake


and


continued


to work


same


kinds


simple


task s


as were


performed


before


study.


From


a review


Gold


s (197


result


can


con-


clouded


that


color


-form


group


(i.e.,


group


that


used


stimulus


redundan t


feature)


learned


training


task


piece


Bendix,


RB-2


coaster


brake)


significantly


faster


than


form- only


group


group


without


access


stimulus


redundant


feature).


Gold


s hypothesis,


that


use


cue


redundancy


does


not


impede


transfer


to a single


relevant


dimension


task,


was

one


not

year


supported.


later)


The


produce


subsequent t


ed dramatic


retention

retention


study (

effects.


[ conducted

For


retention


study,


original 1


subj


ects


participated


and


same


independent


and


dependent


variables


were


used.


addition,


order


presentation


was


include


as an inde-


pendent


variable.


Gold


reported


that


highly


significant


main


effects


were


found


dependent t


measures.


second


study,


Gold


and


Barclay (1973b) were


interested


in comparing


ectiveness


verbal


label s


with


non-


verbal


label s


acquisition


and


retention


rate


a complex


assembly


task


piece


bicycle


brake)


mod-


erately


and


severely


retarded


individuals


(mean


range


-51).


with


subsequent


studies,


"The


general


procedure









Gold


and


Barclay


found


that


there


were


no reliable


differences


between


groups


(Gr oup


verbal


cue


Group


no verbal


cue)


on retention.


From


a review


their


res


ults,


can


concluded


tha t


addition


verbal


cue


facilitated


both


acquisition


and


retention


discrimination.


All


but


three


subjects


(all


from


verbal


cue


group)


reached


a prior


criterion


trials


(the


arbitrary


three


stopping


subjects


Gold


reach


s early


criterion


studies).


Inter


S ix


estingly,


eigh t


consec-


utive


assemblies


without


error


or ass


instance)


dur ing


retraining


and


trials


, resp


ectively.


In another


study


Gold


(1974)


was


primarily y


interested


removal


redundant


cues


that


aid


retard


ed learners


skill


acqui


sition.


Gold


did


not


delineate


procedures,


instead,


referred


to his


study


The


primary


outcome


Gold


(1974)


study


was


not


directly


related


attempts


made


at delineating


what


procedure


, backward,


forward,


total


task)


was


used


acquis


use


ition


different


vocational


procedures


skills


to enable


Gold


those


suggested


subjects


not


tive


reaching


procedure,


predetermined


to reach


criterion,


criterion


under


training


respec-


task.


more


recent


generalizations


Gold


s (197








been


his


(1976)


study


conducted


Dixon


Developmental


Center.


this


study,


Gold


focused


acqui


sition


and


production


severely


and


a complex


profoundly


assembly


retarded,


task


deaf


(bicycle


and


brake)


deaf-blind


persons.


Gold


s primary


focus,


this


study


, was


delineation


train in


sy stem


referred


as Task


Analysis.


Further,


Gold


s three


hypotheses


were


supported


The


more


diffi-


cult


a person


to acquire


task,


more


trainer must


know


about


task,


more


signer


(task


analyst


t knows


about


task


less


prerequi


sites


are


needed


or not


learner,


teach


task


and


severely


decision


or profoundly


teach


handicapped


per


sons


must


bas


on whether


or not


that


task


can


anal


general


into

eelin


teachable


about


components


rather


difficulty of the


than

task.


on some

Unlike


his


previous


studies,


report


this


study


was


more


explicit


about


actual


format


for


this


study


.g.


"One


complete


assembly


brake


constituted


trial"


. 80).


From


an analy


res


s section


evident


that


some


learner s


had


more


difficulty


with


training


task


acqui


than


ers.


sition


order


task


Gold


to facilitate


modified


slower


process


learners


both


feedback


and


format,


and


content.


-- -









The


second


phase


presentation in
third continued


production


area


was
the
the
of t


base
same
total
he Cel


d on


a


total


setting; and
task format
nter. (p. 15


task
the


Abstract)


All


learners


remaining


study


reached


prede-


termined


criterion


under


specified


envir onmen t s


[(1)


training


room


and


production


area


Center]


Spooner


section


et al.


on total


(Note


task


last


presentation,


study


trained


to conclude


severely


retarded


to 16


adolescents


years)


(range


to assemble


an industrial


, range

drain a


pparatus


Although


particular


procedure


was


not


clearly


specified,


may


stated


that


total


task


procedure


was


used.


There


are


at least


salient


features


to Spooner


.'s study.


First,


can


concluded


from


a review


results


that


similar


proc


edures


have


been


effective


with


adult


retarded


populations


(Gold,


1972


1976)


and


were


also


effective


with


one


particular


group


severely


retarded


adolescents.


Second,


Gold


and


Pomerantz


s (1978)


guid


lines


vocational


education


strategies


were


effective


least


one


programatic


effort.


Investigators


using


total


task


(whole


method)


approach


have


also


been


effective


training


their


respective


popu-


nations.


one


self-help


s tudy


, Homer


and


Keilitz


(1975)


attributed


he acquis


ition o


toothbrushing


skills


some-








Gold


(1972)


was


one


first


investigator s


to employ


a total


task


procedure


training


vocational


tasks


to retarded


persons.


Further,


has


been


reliably


demon-


strated


Gold


and


other s


.g.,


Spooner


& Hendrickson,


1976;


Spooner


al.,


Note


tha t


total


task


procedure


has


been


effective


training


severely


and


profoundly


handicapped


persons


to conduct


vocationally


related


tasks.


Forward


Chaining


Al though


forward


chain in


g procedure


is not


one


procedures


bein


tested


this


investigation,


has


been


used


teach


severely


and


profoundly


retarded


individual s


self


-help


and


vocational


tasks.


Bellamy


(1979)


have


suggested


that


there


are


three


functional


tra inin


g procedure


es.


They


are


backward


chaining,


tot-


task


res


entation,


and


forward


chaining.


When


a forward


chain


being


used


train


an experi-


men tal


task


organism


trained


to acquire


an a prior


task,


first


criterion


and


step


a reinforced


follows


subsequently


each


time


that


step


performed


cor-


rectly.


Next,


second


step


task


added;


individual


performs


first


steps


and


reinforced


for


correct


execution


both


responses.


The


step


are


added


this


forward


fashion


until


whole


respon-


ses


tha t


are


necessary


to perform


task


are


acquired.









stimulus


from


termination


chain,


less


effective


a conditioned


both


as a discriminative


reinforced.


Reynolds


stimulus


state


There
second
force


come s
link


because


reinforcement


not


reinforce


However,
still eff


this s
active


a point


w


such a
of its
of the


here t
weak
dista
sequen


stimulus


conditioned
nce from th


ce


ne response
stimulus of


tha t
the
seco


a discriminative


firs


rein-
e final
will
t link.


nd link


stimulus


will


necessary
This, of
the third


occasion


for a
course
link


at least


dvanc emen t


means


tha


the o
into
t the


an effective


ne response
the third 1
stimulus o
conditioned


ink.
f


reinforced.


stimulus


The
of


fac
the


t remains,
second link


however
will c


that


ease


to function


as a conditioned


reinforced


even


though
native


it continue s


stimulus


to fun
p. 62)


action


as a discrim-


star tin


in a forward


fashion


with


long


list


responses,


or so,


first


step


and


even


first


few


steps


operant


chain


are


at least


steps


(and


so on,


Even


respectively)


though


there


away


from


fundamental I


termination


problem


task.


lessened


effectiveness


stimulus


a discriminative


stimulus


and

via


a conditioned


a forward


reinforced


chain in


when


g procedure,


long


tasks


been


are trained

used effectively


train


various


tasks


severely/profoundly


retarded


learners,


Azrin


et al.,


1976


Bellamy


et al.,


1975;


Hunter


Bellamy,


1976).


Acquisition


Self-Help


Skills


a~~~~ I- aA*a- 4a-


i


r


rr


f


J


I I


r









to other

& Ball,


studies


1967


(Ball


; Watson,


et al.,

1972), A


1971;


Lzrin


Homer


et al.,


1970


1976,


Minge


stated:


The evide
ification
have not
ing dress
after man


nce
pro
been


ing
y m


indicates that new
cedures have been o
substantially succ
to the profoundly r


monthss


training.


behavior


f value,
essful i
retarded,
(p. 29)


mod-
but


teach-


even


Therefore,


dressing


Azr in


and


et al.,


undressing


initiated


which


a new


included


program


a list


teaching


principal


characteristics.


Azrin


et al.


listed


primary


characteristics


their


training


pertinent


procedure.


this


The


part


characteristic


review


their


that


use


most


forward


cha in ing.


They


stated:


Instead of b
a forward se
ticipated fu
in the final


ackward
quence
lly in


cha
n w


, component


inning, t
which the
initial,
s of the


e method
s tuden t
as well


ess


used
par-
as
actions.


29)


From


a review


Azrin


et al


. 's results


see


Figure


can


concluded


that


seven


subj


ects


enrolled


program


obtained


mastery


ess


skills


hour


s training


time.


These


hours


took


place


over


a period


four


training


days.


Acquisition


Vocational


Skills


Investigators


such


as Bellamy


et al


1975


Hunter


and E

Reid.


lellamy,


Note


1976;

: Tate


O'Neill


and


and


Baroff.


Bellamy


1967


1978


have


; Spooner


reDorted


and


a. -


.


.K


*


I















DRESSING TRAINING


N = 7 RETARDED PERSONS


5 10 15
1 2 3


20 HOURS
4 DAYS


TRAINING TIME


Figur e


cent


fun
of


students


trained


action of training time.
teaching profoundly reta
a reinforcement-guidance
H.. Schaeffer. R. M.. &


Mental
duced


Retardation,


with


1976


r


to crit
From "A
ded per
method"


Wesolowski
4 (6), 29-


erion
raDi


as a
d method


sons to dress
by Azrin,


, M.
33.


D.,
Repro-


permission.


l00o









less


effective


farther


from


termination


chain,


trainees


were


able


to acquire


as many


steps


via


a forward


chaining


procedure


(Hunter


& Bellamy w


1976).


Bellamy


et al


(1975)


investigation


potential


competence


vocational


ability


severely


and


pro-


foundly


retarded


persons


highlighted


Two


subjects


were


used,


both


had


been


institutionalized


at least


years,


and


both


subjects


were


profoundly


retarded.


this


1975


study


, Bellamy


et al.


reviewed


several


training


procedures


investigators


which


had


made


contri-


butions


literature;


however,


Bellamy


et al.


paid


particular


attention


those


tra in ing


procedures


used


Gold


and


Barclay


(1973a,


1973b).


these


studies


there


was


a focus


on alternative


training


procedure s


(i.e. ,


1973a


learning


difficult


visual


scriminations


1973b


use


nonverbal


training


techniques).


Bellamy


and


his


co-worker


(1975)


used


forward


chaining


teach


acquisition


skill


necessary


to assemble


a 52-piece


cam


switch


actuator.


regard


delineation


procedure


they


stated:


During
S reach
in which]
A trial
segment


caomhn t


training


a
all


crite
step


involved


beinj


(n


g tau
1'M


each


segment


was


rion of two cons
s were performed
performing each
ght together wit


taught


e


s


h


until


cutive trials
correctly.
ten in the


&


previous


s









conclude


, Bellamy


and


his


co-workers


(1975)


indicated


vocational


hab il ita tion


a feasible


goal


for


severely


and


profoundly


retarded


adults


because


with


appropriate


training


these


individuals


can


learn


to assemble


tasks


with


similar


amoun t


complexity


as a 52 piece


cam


switch


actuator.


can


demonstrated


that


severely


handi-


capped


person


can


reliably


assemble


complex


tasks,


such


as a cam


switch


actuator


remunerative


work


contracts


should


available


to support


this


hab il ita tion.


Among


eight


step s


del in


eate


d in


procedure


section


Hunter


and


Bellamy


s (1976)


arti


step


five


contained


use


a forward


chaining


procedure.


i


were
forme
each
steps
then
manne


a
d


s forward
dded as s


se


O


cha in ing
on as pr


procedure
evious ones


independently. Thus t
ssion by independently


which ha
received
r already


d


been


eviousl


training in
described.


new
(p


new s
were


trainee


completing
v learned


steps
8)


teps
per-
began
the
and
he


Hunter


and


Bellamy


task


was


assembly


a cable


harness


used


in current


relay


pan


els.


train


ees


involved


study


reached


pre


scribed


criterion


five


con-


secutive


cable


ass


emblies


follows


pilot


trainee,


hour s


work


days;


trainee


hours,


work


days


; (3)


trainee


hour s


work


days


another


investigation,


O'Neill


and


Bellamy


(1978),


trained


severely


retard


woman


to assemble


linkks









and


Bellamy


s article,


can


concluded


tha t


forward


chain-


was


used.


The


subj ec t


involved


study,


a 30


year


severe-


retarded


woman,


learned


to perform


three


segments


task


were


independently


implemented.


Thr ough


after

the


the

use


training


procedures


a multiple


base-


line


design


across


task


segments


see


Figure


can


interpreted


that


procedures


were


functionally


related


trainee


s gains.


third


study,


Spooner


and


Reid


(Note


trained


institutionalized


tional iza tion


retarded


mean


persons

'47) to


(mean


yea


assemble


rs of

a wood


institu-

en planter


requiring


steps.


These


inves tiga tors


used


a modified


forward


chain


teach


acqui


sition


task


to 10


trainees.


In this
chaining
grouped t
criterion
format wa


investigation, a mo
(i.e., a large numb
together and trained


before
s used,


adding
(p. 6)


dified


e


another


forward


r of steps were
to a specified


group


Not


field


only


criterion


did


subj ects


four


consecutive


learn


task


assemblies


to a speci-


without t


error


or assistance


, they


also


were


able


to produce


task


hours


a day


a mean


rate


planters


per


hours


with


a mean


error


rate


.818


days


pro-


ductions.


In Spooner


and


Reid


study, the


focus


was


not


steps)





























u0)
a-s
L.
0 C
0
S-
O


-. .-- .. .-- -


S U 20 2 I 1Ir 1 30 fl 40 10 11 *0 41 70 71 300 ES1 900 '1o 00l *i II no


-rtS


Figure


Number


unassisted


train in


task


step s
probe


(vertical


segment.


saw


teaching
retarded


completed correctly
s conducted before


intervention
"Evaluation


From


chain


woman"


Men ta 1


Reproduced


with


assembly
O 'Neill,


Retardation,


to
C.
1978


during
and after


line) on each
procedure for


sevi


&


T.,
. 16


merely
Bellamy,
(1), 37-41.


permission.









was


a documented


replication


Gold'


s (1976)


task


analysis


stem


with


a different


task


and


a different


learner


popu-


lation


fourth


study


related


use


forward


chaining


procedures


was


conducted


Tate


and


Baroff


(1967)


They


stated


that


forward


chaining


was


used


teaching


skills


which


necessary


a basic


to assemble


unit


an electronic


control


relay


circuitry


panel


an operant


conditioning


apparatus


and


some


teaching


machine


es.


The


subjects


used


were


mildly


and


moderately


retarded


residents


state


institution


for


mentally


retarded


persons


North


Carolina.


regard


training


procedures


used,


Tate


and


Baroff


stated:


general,
cess of e


effort


!ach


was


worker


directed
from the


toward
beginning


insuring
g of


training,
p e tently
The jobs
a simple


trained


through e
performing
were broke
first task


on each


ach
the


n


step


step,
task


until
on his


down into di
selected, and
. (p. 406)


was


com-


own.


screte
the w


parts
orker


Al though


specific


results


were


not


reported,


can


concluded


tha t


training


procedures


were


effective


that


one


year


later


a fulltime


supervisor


was


hired


and


new


employees


(trainee


were


secured.


Al th ough


Pennypacker


(Note


and


Reynolds


(1975)


have


suggest


that


there


are


fundamental


theoretical


problems









learning


self


-help


and


vocational


skills.


Azrin


et al.


(1976)


indicated


that


backward


chaining


had


not


been


sub-


stantially


successful


teaching


dressing


skill


even


after


many


months


training;


therefore


forward


chaining


was


used.


Numerous


inve


stigators


have


found


forward


chaining


to be


effective


with


varied


tasks


many


component t


parts.


Similar


to backward


chainin g


and


total


task


presentation,


forward


cha in ing,


when


used


as an acquisition


procedure,


has


been


effective.


Investigators,


some


experiments


have


concluded


that


forward


chaining


been


more


ective


than


backward


cha in ing.


Comparison


Backward,


Forward


and


Total


Task


Presentations


Various


investigators


have


made


comparisons


backward,


forward,


and


total


task


procedures


(formats)


training


their


McGuigan


ese


experimental


MacCaslin


investigator s


subjects


1955


and


(Blake


Walls


ers


.g.


Williams,


et al.,


Nettleb


1969


pre


& Kirby,


1976)


have


use


d both


normal


and


retarded


populations


order


assess


effects


various


methods


task


acquis


ition.


Not


tasks


use


d by


various


resea


rchers


have


Naylor


been


classifi


& Briggs,


as manipulative


1963,


a Markov


or vocational


prediction


(i.e.,


situation).


From


a review


procedures


used


various


investi-


nations


evident


that


----- -


procedures


are


not


defined









a design


.g.


McGuigan,


1960,


Kohs


Block


Design


test)


while


the remaining

same example,


three

the


quadrants


second


were


quadrant


not

was


exposed

exposed


together.

next


a procedure


similar


to forward


chaining,


but


other


three


quadrant


were


hidden


from


view.


Al though


Naylor


and


Briggs


and


McGuigan


formats


differ


some


cases


dras-


tically,


from


definitions


backward


chaining


, forward


chaining


and


total


task


presentation


use


d by


operant


research-


ers,


hypothesized


that


they


will


great


value


showing


cross-


task


and


cross-subj ec t


generalization


respective


formats.


There


scant


literature


available


present


time,


which


investigator s


have


focused


comparison


procedures


(e.g.,


forward


and


backward


chaining


and


total


task


presentation)


with


retarded


and


severely


retarded


subj


ects.


Therefore,


investigators


asking


experimental


stions


concerning


whole


vs.


part


methods


have


been


included


this


review


literature.


Walls


tiveness


et al.

forward


(in

and


press) h

backward


ave


inves tiga ted


cha in in


and


total


effec-

task


presentation


with


retarded


learners.


Their


investigation


mos t


germane


this


investigation.


Compari


sons


with


Retarded


Subjects


TT-1 1 -


- a-


-- - l-A-e~ -fl


?YY IUJ3li*\ ~L ~


ir


/ .








discrepant


terminology.


For


example,


direct-repetitive


part


method


used


Naylor


(1962)


comparable


to forward


chaining


in operant


terminology.


Also


, the


Wall


et al.


article


most


germane


this


study


that


directly


assesses


formats


(backward


chaining


and


total


task)


used


this


inves


tigation.


The


focus


Walls


et al


press)


study


was


a comparison


backward


chaining


forward


chaining


(direct


(reverse-direct-rep


repetitive


etitive


part),


part),


and


total


task


(whole


task)


methods


training


three


complex


assembly


tasks


, bicycle


brake


meat


grinder


, and


carbura tor )


to mild


to moderately


retard


ed adults


(age


range


to 46


years).


The


three


assemblies


were


task


analy


zed into


055


teachable


components.


Walls


et al


not


sent


analyzed


component t


parts


task


article.


With


regard


training


methods


each


subject


was


randomly


ass


signed


to a counterbalanced


order


training


methods


and


assemblies


tha t


he/she


learned


a new


ass


embly


a different


method


on each


three


consecutive


That


each


subjects


was


exposed


to each


three


training


methods,


forward


chaining


backward


chaining,


and


whole


task


each


used


with


diff


erent


assembly


The


investigator s


(Walls


et al.


press)


described


IT- 1S n i 1% .


m


rr


I n


I








cha in ing


Step


add


part


an otherwise


completed


assembly


criterion),


Step


, add


parts


and


otherwise


completed


assembly,


whole


task


(total


task)


trial


has


and


subj ec t


to criterion


putting


. These


ether


definitions


parts


are


every


congruent


with


definition


chaining


procedures


used


this


investigator


and


other


operan t


researchers.


From


an examination


results


can


concluded


that


three


methods,


whole


task


method


was


least


effective.


The


percent


responses


that


were


errors


was


average


more


than


twice


as great


subj ects


whole


task


method


as for


subjects


using


either


chain-


method.


chaining


The


procedure


error


did


rates


not


for


vary.


training


Total


using


time


either


to criterion


did


not


differ


among


chaining


and


whole


methods.


Walls


et al.


conclude


stating


, "Slow


learning


g subjects


benefitted


substantially


from


tematic


chaining


procedures"


another


study,


Nettleb


and


Kirby


(1976)


studied


effects


whole


and


par t


methods


(pure


part


and


progressive


part)


acquisition


skill


necessary


thread


industrial


sewing


machine.


The


subj ects


were


young


mildly


retarded


women


(range


to 33


years,


range


to 83).


In Nettlebeck


and


Kirby


s study


, pure


par t


meant


each


operation


was


learned


to a predetermined


criterion,


. 2).








whole


method


practiced


complete


task


from


outset.


The


experimental


design


was


as follows.


Thirty


subjects


were


allocated


randomly


, ten


to each


three


groups


which


learned


subjects


task


one


using


group


different


used


training


pure-part


methods.


method


All


and


subjects


each


remaining


groups


use


d progressive


part


and


whole


par t


methods.


clear


from


an examina-


tion


experimental


design


tha t


not


all


subjects


were


exposed


to all


training


procedure


Nettlebeck


and


Kirby


(1976)


have


suggest


that


part


training


procedures


whe


procedures

n teaching


were superior

mildly retarde


to whole

d workers


training

an indus-


trial


task.


They


stated:


With


only


training


one


exception,


those


trained


performance
by the whol


during
e method


was
part
in t
was
not


meth


poorer


pro
ime


than


cedure
taken


subs tantia


S


that of
Howeve


to learn
I. the D


significantly
od. (p. 119)


trainees
r. while


by part
rogressiv


better


than


taught by
the savings


procedures


-part


was


pure-part


Two

Banks


other


inve


& Baer,


19


stigators

66) have


(i.e

asked


Patterson


similar


et al.,


experimental


Note

ques-


tions.


both


experiments, Patterson


et al.


and


Bank


and


Baer,


vocational


tasks


were


used.


Patterson

effectiveness s


et al


forward


.'s study


and


was


design


backward


chaining


compare

with r


respect


es.









leng th


number


time


errors


to learn


training


tasks,


, and


the
after


durability


r


response


chain


measured


treatment.


The


subjects


were


female


residents


a state


institution


for


mentally


retarded


persons.


The


women


ranged


age


from


to 22


years


, with


a mean


years.


The


subjects


' IQ


scores


ranged


from


to 55


with


a mean


The


experiment.


investigators


From


used


total


an observation


tasks


Figure


evident


that


tasks


were


not


a complex


nature.


From


an examination


Patterson


et al


.'s results


may


concluded


that


no conclusive


statement t


can


made


with


respect


use


forward


and


backward


chaining


procedures.


Patterson


et al.


concluded


stating:


While
for t
this


4


neither procedure
.e particular asso


does


not


procedure mig
Certainly, we
one technique


mean


ht


was


r tmen


that


not


should


when


significantly superior
t of tasks involved,


other


more


guar
others


un investigated, might b
tive. (p. 10-11, 1974)


d


task s


one


appropriate.


against


even
equally


pre


though


or mo


scribing
relatively
re effec-


Banks


and


Baer


(1966)


conducted


a double


experiment.


both


experiments,


authors


were


concerned


with


two


experimental


questions.


first


experimental


question


was


"whether


teaching


a performance


chaining


more




























~jaC'f
Cip


Figur e


SIX


tasks


used


Patterson.


Panvan


. Wv


att


0


U~~L


0.


.. r









first


experiment,


subjects


were


adolescent,


mildly


retarded


boys


from


Parson


s State


Hospital


and


Tra in ing


Center.


investigator


did


not


include


further


information


regarding


boys


range


The


subjects


were


required


to learn


was


sequence


five


switch


movements.


From


a review


Banks


and


Baer


s description


apparatus,


may


concluded


that


apparatus


was


not


a complex


one.


From


an examination


results


section


experi-


ment


may


concluded


that


there


was


not


differential


advantage


to either


number


chaining


errors,


procedure.


may


stated


From


an analysis


tha t


chaining


procedures


were


more


efficient


training


condition


than


terminal


contingency


(total


task).


second


experiment,


investigator s


explored


stable


effects


chain in


on sub


sequent


problems


one


subject.


The


subject


was


one


mildly


retarded


adolescent


boy


that


participated


first


experiment.


The


experi-


meters


used


same


apparatus


as used


experiment


For


second


experiment,


Banks


and


Baer


sugge


that


both


time


and


trials


to criterion


terminal


contingency


(total


task)


was


most


effect


tive


three


procedures.


effective


procedure.


Backward


The


chaining


was


investigators


next


found


most


forward


chaining








contingency )


with


human


subjects


in two


experiments.


They


conclude


stating:


differences


subjects


on any


both
and
the
subj
for
cies
all


between
the t


chaining
required
terminal


ect


desig


both time
, backward
differed f


were obtai
:n forward


:hree


measure


conditions


significantly


contingency
n resulted


and


trials


chaining
rom each


most to least ettfficien
from a correction to a
eliminated differences


agency
were
(Bank


and
more
s &


backward
efficient


Baer


t


. 7,


t


in


ned from groups of
or backward chaining


s employed.
oduced less
less time t
total task).
the finding


, terminal
and forward


other
in t


and


hat


However,
errors


han


g


did
single


that


contingen-
chaining


were
order


non-correction


between


chaining, bo
than forward


from
Changing
procedure


terminal contin-
th of which


d


chainin


1966)


In a fifth


study,


which


part


subjects


were


retarded


persons


(mean


.21,


6.65)


Blake


and


Williams


(1969)


assessed


whole


and


part


methods


acqui


ition


nine


pairs


CVC


trigrams


.g.,


wup


692,


Piv


JAD


538)


The


other


subjects


study


were


normal


(mean


102.


and


superior


(mean


persons.


For


training,


subj ects


receiving


whole


method,


entire


list


nine


pairs


was


administered


on each


trial


Subj ects


usin


pure


parts


method


received


material


according


foll owing


schedule:


Part


(second

three p


(first


three


airs


three


pairs)

trials


pairs


trial s


trials


through


thr ough


through


Part


Part


progressive


(third

part


training,


subjects


followed


same


training


as pure-









Blake


first


and


research


Wil iams


objective


had


was


research


to examine


objectives.


relationships


The


among


retarded,


normal


and


superior


subjects


and


rote


learning


nine


associated


pairs.


Groups


equated


did


not


differ


number


pairs


learned.


Group s


equated


for


did


differ


superior


subj ects


exceeded


normal subjects


and the


retarded


subjects


while


normal


subjects


exceeded


retarded


subjects.


The


second


research


objective


was


to determine


whether


whole


and


parts


method


for


organic


pair


practice


influenced


relationship s


among


retarded


, normal,


and


superior


groups


' rote


learning


The


group s


did


not


respond


differentially;


and


three


methods


did


not


influence


relation


us in


ships


among


whole-method


groups.


performed


In all


mos t


group s,


adequa t


and


subjects


subjects


using


pure-parts


and


progressive


parts


methods


performed


with


similar


adequacy.


Comparisons


with


Normal


Subjects


Three


sets


investigators


have


reported


using


normal


subjects


various


backgrounds


recruit


soldiers,


and


undergraduate


different


task s


psychology


rifle


student t


and


marksmanship


training


and


Markov


task


prediction)


assess


effectiveness


same


... S S


. 1 Z


1


I


r


*









McGuigan


and


MacCaslin


(1955)


reported


assessing


effectiveness


whole


and


part


methods


acqui


sition


of a perceptual


motor


skill


(i.e.,


rifle


marksmanship).


The


subjects


were


trainees


Fort


Knox,


Kentucky


infantry


company.


second


experiment,


a repetition


first,


subjects


were


trainees


a Fort


Jackson,


South


Carolina,


infantry


company


According


to McGuigan


and


MacCas


there


were


several


sub task s

an army


which

rifle.


comprised


The


trainee


process

learned


s of

(a)


1 earn ing


assume


to fire

certain


well-defined


postures


firing


standing


, kneelin


sitting


and


prone


sitions


; (b)


either


wrap


(hasty.


.sling)


loop


(loop


sling)


rifle


sling


about


his


arm


p05


ition


demands


move


sight-adjustment


to alter


strike


bullet


; (d)


to load


and


unload


weapon;


and


other


sub tasks.


training,


group


was


tr a in


ed using


repetitive


part


method.


Each


learner


received


instruction


first


sub ta sk


firing


act,


then


sec


simul-


taneous


with


practice


first


then


on subtasks


(a),


(b),


and


together


, and


so on until


were


put


together


into


act


firing.


Group


was


trained


using


whole


method.


They


were


instructed


entire


se-


quenc e


movements


on every


trial.


Group


wa s


trained


4~~~~ -U .4 --n


r


*


rr


r r









results


are


considered


to be


an important


part


total


firing


behavior.


Group


received


training,


train-


ees


group


were


given


only


essential


instruction


includ-


safety


precaution


and


range


procedures.


From


an examination


results


can


concluded


that


a whole


method


learning


a complex,


perceptual


motor


skill,


such as rifle


marksman


ship,


was


superior


part


methods


subjects


levels


intelligence e


McGuigan


and


MacCa


slin


sugg


ested


that


whole


method


may


superior


part


method


fact


that


whole


method


involves


distributed


practice


firing,


goal-act


rifle


marksman ship


second


s tudy


, Naylor


and


Brigg


(1963)


evaluated


whole


and


progressive


part


procedures


training


with


undergraduate


, female,


students


introductory


psychol-


classes


with


a Markov


prediction


situation.


Briefly,


a Markov


asked


prediction


to make


situation


predictions


one


about


which


stimuli


subj


(i.e.,


ect


air-


craft,


carrier


, or submarine)


location


stimuli


(i.e.,


left,


center


, or right)


and


number


stimuli


, one,


two,


or three


objects


a single


type).


Naylor


and


Briggs'


study


was


signed


test


Naylor


(196


interaction


hypothesis.


Nay 1 or


stated


that:


.e.









relatively
(b) for ta


an increase
becoming su
(p. 21)


more


sks


shou


period


efficient t
relatively
Id result i
r to the wh


han
low


par t


methods;


organization


n a part
ole-task


task


method


procedure.


For


and


:he whole

made all


training

three pr


procedure


editions


, the

(i.e. ,


groups

type,


(1, 3

where


and


number)


every


stimulus


even t


throughout


entire


five-day


period


The


group


s receiving


progressive


part


training g


and


predicted


only


type


(i.e.


aircraft,


where


session


number


type


on session


and


and


number


three


on sess


dimensions


sessions


The


progr


essive


part


-procedure,


this


investigation


different


from


forward


cha in ing.


this


case,


investigator s


did


not


train


type,


example,


a pre-


determined


criterion


before


adding


type


zone


(where).


The


whole


method


this


study


same


used


tra-


ditional


studies


and


does


not


vary


from


true


total


task


format.


From


an examination


results


evident


that


group s


rece


giving


progressive


part


training


exceeded


skill


level


group s


receiving


whole


training


transfer


performance


high-complexity


low


task-organization.


For


an unorganized


task


, part


train-


surpa


sse


d whole


training


efficiency


when


task









between


task


complexity


and


task


organization


seemed


sub-


stantiated.


Given


task


high


organization,


increasing


difficulty


tended


to favor


whole


training


method


efficiency


relative


to progressive


part


efficiency.


Exactly


reverse


was


true


with


task


low


organization.


McGuigan


(1960)


studied


effects


whole


and


part


procedures


learning


of Koh


s Block


design


test


Koh


s Block


design


test


test


involving


manipulation


blocks.


When


block


have


been


manipulated


into


appropriate


position,


they


form


a specific


design


es.


All


side s


block


can


use


d in


process


developing


correct


pattern.


Subjects


were


undergraduate


women at


.Hollins


College.


Nine


undergraduate


women


psychology


were


trained


experimenters.


Four


different


variations


part,


whole


methods


were


used.


The


four


different


conditions


were


part method,


very-incomplete-whole


method,


incomplete-whole


method,


and


whole


method.


For


subj ects


receiving


part


method,


four


blocks


were


given


and


subjects


were


allowed


to look


at only


first


quadrant


design.


The


remaining


three


quadrants


were


not


exposed


sub-


jects.


The


subjects


reproduced


first


quadrant


times.


Next,


second


quadrant


was


exposed


while


other


three








The


part


method


used


here


does


not


resemble


forward


chaining


First,


parts


are


not


added


progressively,


quad-


rant


(criterion)


then


quadrant


1 and


(criterion)


and


so on.


Second,


a criterion


errorless


performances


not


established.


The


learner


merely


repeats


design


times


, regardless


outcome.


very


incomplete-whole,


subjects


were


given


eight


blocks


reproduced


and


exposed


half


they


to half


saw


design


times


Next,


and

the


then

first


half


design


was


cover


and


sec


half


ex-


posed.


Aga in,


as with


first


half


subjects


repro-


duced


second


half


esign


times.


For


incomplete


whole


procedure


design


was


divided


into


unequal


parts.


First,


first,


second,


and


third


quadrants


were


exposed


simultaneously


while


fourth


quadrant


was


covered.


The


subj


ects


reproduced


these


three


quadrants


a unit


times.


sequently,


fourth


quadrant


was


exposed,


while


first


three


quad-


rants


were


cover


Subj


ects


also


produced


this


fourth


quadran t


esign


times.


whole


training


procedures,


no part


design


was


ever


covered.


Hence,


subjects


reproduced


sign


times


as a


total


unit.


The


description


whole


training


procedure


consistent


with


standard


total


nrnrt ircri..


t~ ~lt








unit)


better


performance.


That


McGuigan


finding s


agreed


with


previous


findings


McGuigan


& MacCa


slin)


that


much


superiority


whole


training


procedure


may


due


fact


that


entails


distributed


practice.


Cox


and


Boren


(1965)


examined


three


different


training


techniques


(i.e.,


backward


chaining,


forward


chaining


and


total


task


presentation)


training


men


to perform


72-action


procedure


on Nike


Hercules


equipment.


The


Nike


Hercules


system,


Blue


Status


procedures


for


Section


Control


Indicator


(SCI)


72-step


fixed


procedure


during


which


individual


prepares


missile


firing.


The


investigator


broke


step s


into


seven


operant


spans.


Gilbert


operants


which


(1962


follow


defined

one a


an operant


another


span


as a group


chronological


order.


Cox


and


Boren


suggest ted


that


an operant


span


has


an optimum


length


efficient


learning.


The


optimal


number


operants


span


estimated


and


s subject


to change


based


experience.


The


investigator s


defined


procedures


as follows:


men


were


methods.


assigned d


The


men


at random


receiving


to each


backward


three


chaining


teaching


procedure,


learned


last


span


first.


Next,


train e


performed


last


two


spans


and


so on in


reverse


order.


The









presentation


were


not


given


specific


operan t


spans


to learn.


The


men


practiced


steps


every


time.


Cox


and


Boren


reported


that


there


were


no significant


differences


among


procedures.


From


a review


results


section


study,


may


concluded


that


men


rece


giving


operant


spans


.e.,


forward


or backward


chaining)


were


no more


efficient


than


men


receiving


whole


task


method.


The


men


trained


backward


chaining


procedure


were


no more


efficient


than


those


men


trained


forward


cha in ing


procedure.


Several


studies


conclusions


which


can


procedures


drawn


have


from


een


this


compare


review


First


all,


there


a wide


range


and


variety


definitions


for


procedures.


Secondly


not


subjects


investigation s


have


been


retarded


or severely


retarded


individuals.


Finally


, when


backward


chaining


was


one


compared


procedures,


was


not


most


effective


and


efficient


procedure.


Summary


Related


Literature


summary,


only


three


investigators


* .e.,


Banks


& Baer


, 1966


; Patterson


et al


Note


Walls


et al.,


press)


area


vocational


train in


retarded


persons


have


compared


effectiveness


backward


chaining


with


total


task


pre


sensation.


None


of the investigators


v--


w









findings


and


conclusions.


Consequently,


purpose


study


to investigate


effectiveness


these


procedures


with


regard


acqui


sition


a complex


task


severely


and


profoundly


retarded


persons


important t


consideration


investigation,


emerging


from


previous


review


literature,


fac t


that


procedure s


have


been


reported


to be


effec-


tive


isolation.


When


a compare


son


was


made


with


mildly


retarded


learner s


subj ects


Wall


et al.,


press

total


chaining


task


procedures


presentation


were


When


more


mildly


effective than

retarded women


learned


thread


an industrial


sewing


machine, part


methods


were


superior


to whol


methods.


There


ample


evidence


that


sugg


ests


that


would


appropriate


to examine


effectiveness


and


efficiency


backward


chaining


and


total


task


esentation.


Evidence


also


been


presented


which


sugge


sts


need


to examine


unanimou s


acceptance


any


training


procedure


, especially


with


regard


to severely


handicapped


learners


acquiring


complex


vocational


ass


embly


skill


attempt


to respond


these


nonc onclus ive


points


has


been


made


sent


study


conducting


an operant


analy s i


effects


backward


chaining


and


total


task


presentation.












CHAPTER


METHOD S


AND


PROCEDURES


Backward


chaining,


forward


chaining,


and


total


task


presentations


have


been


found


to be


eff ec tive


training


procedures


teaching


self-help


and


complex


voca-


tional


skills


to severely


and


profoundly


retarded


persons.


When


ese


procedures


have


been


compared


using mildly


retarded


subjects,


chaining


procedures


have


appeared


to be


superior


total


task


or whole


method


procedures.


For


purposes


this


study


only


procedures


(i.e.,


backward


chaining


and


total


task


esentation)


were


tested


for


their


effectiveness


and


efficiency.


From


a review


erature,


apparent


that


pro-


cedures


backward


chainin g


and


total


task


presentation


are


most


frequently


discussed.


Also,


evident


that


these


procedures


have


not


been


compared


training


severely


and


profoundly


retarded


learners


to perform


vocational


tasks.


Statemen t


Hypotheses


fulfill


purposes


s tudy,


following


hypoth


eses


were


tested:


There


are


no differences


between


celebrations









a complex


vocational


task


to a severely


or profoundly


re-


tarded


person.


There


are


no differences


between


trial s


to cri


terion


for


subjects


when


backward


chaining


or total


task


presentation


used


teach


a complex


vocational


task


severely


or profoundly


retarded


person.


Subjects


The


subjects


were


eight


(two


sets


four)


severely


and

the

The


They


profoundly

Sunland Tr

subjects r


were


retarded


gaining

anged


further


residents


Center,


age


selected


at Gaine


from


for


range


ville,


through


inclusion


-15)


Florida.


year


sample


having


no motor


problems


involving


hand


exterity,


visual


or hearing


acuity,


or self-mutilating


behavior


After


residents


that


were


between


ages


and


year


and


had


met


other


criteria


specifications


had


been


selected,


they


were


further


cho


sen


for


inclusion


sample


through


use


table


random


numbers.


The


principal


investigator


was


responsible


for


choosing


random


number


as well


selecting


client


popu-


nation


res


earch


study


Tra iner s


Trainer


s for


investigation


were


provided









one


additional


brated


person.

training


The

and


additional


data


staff


collection


member


was


procedures


cali-


both


tasks


prior


first


client


tra in in


That


other


staff


member


was


structed


what


was


regarded


correct


and


incorrect


performance


on each


task


as well


difference


between


backward


chaining


and


total


task


presenta-


tion.


After


additional


trainer


was


ins truck ted


was


tested


principal


investigator


prior


training


client


on appropriate


tra in ing


procedures,


duration


timin


and


data


collection


procedures.


Based


on a review


literature,


taken


other


investigators


., Gold,


1972


; Spooner


& Reid,


Note


; Spooner


et al.,


Note


hours,


hours,


and


hours


, respectively,


train


naive


trainers


appropriate


ins


tructional


techniques


to conduct


complex


assembly


task


training.


For


purp


oses


this


investigation,


trainers


were


not


naive,


initially,


training


needs


low


functioning


persons;


therefore,


less


time


was


anticipated.


trainers


spent


approximate


eigh t


hours


joint


general


review


experimental


question


and


li'tera-


ture


er ta in ing


experimental


question.


amount


time


that


was


devoted


specific


training


addi-


tional


trainer


was


ess


than


one


hour


order


him


meet


tr a inning


criteria.


additional


trainer


observed


principal


inves


tigator









For


this


investigation


there


was


no measure


inter-


observer


reliability.


This


decision


was


based


on Johnston


and


Pennypacker'


press)


s ta temen t


tha t


or more


servers


to d


etect


behavioral


events


cannot


provide


inf or-


mat ion


about


reliability


any


one


observer


s judgment"


320.


was


Reliab il ity


stability


repeated


trainers'


judgment t


responses


presentations


same


or procedures


single


stimulus


observer


comply


used


over


Reli-


ability


for


procedures


used


could


only


determined


comparing


repeated


observer


j udgmen t s


to each


other


over


series


presentations


tasks


with


an individual


subject.


Setting


Experimental


sessions


took


place


grounds


Sunland


Training


Center


, Gainesville,


Florida.


Training


rooms


were


provided


Vocational


Training


Department


Sunland


Training


Center.


The


training


room


at Sunland


Center


not


contain


other


persons


in training


(i.e.,


groups


single


sess


time


experimental


sess


ions


this


investigation


room


used


training


there


were


tables


equal


size


and


chairs


each


table,


one


learner


and


one


for


experimenter.


Other


materials


were


training


tray


see


Figure


three


complete


sets


task


to be


trained


during


that


sess


ion,


and


sufficient


and


appropriate


data


collection


forms


task


being



















ir.a rr"


-u"


r,,,
i~i'~
tiri7,Zt's -


,EWIw --


.J


j


-19 Y". a ,J< J ,~ .'
Ii'," -,li ~ I ~~ *r
Alit -r* ~
~~~~4~ -S~~ij
*~ -,'"0- X- '*
**"-(Pl,,"
2.~TY*:* 4~ r~c..l 5~-\ 4t -~
:2:-
-''4


- ~ % t. -


FI. "1?.7V .wI


At- r. -
-..~ -






I.Z~ -
~2~ 'b '




/~ a .4- g ";~
-*f:( :f". 1I ~r


a1; -<


t.I -'-- I


.-
*1
'!


4 *,


, -


VtI


Ir
r-


'~,


'->


yr'"b~*"
Il~"h
.,,J";'
~ia~L


I


*~rh,~n~


,


""Y~~









Apparatus


Assemblies.


Two


different


assemblies


were


put


gether


each


subject.


The


task


parts


each


assembly


consi


sted


seven


different


pieces.


c amponents


assemblies


were


identical


or interchangeable


One


assembly,


a drain,


was


compo


mm drain


head


, (2)


a 6


mm rubber


washer,


mm hexagonal


lock


washer


, (4)


a 4


mmby


mm pipe,


mm slip


a 4.5


nut


mm rubber


, (6)


mm plastic


stopper


Figure


washer,


. The


and


other


ass


embly,


a gate


valve,


was


composed


a 6


mm turn


knob,


a 1


mm nut,


a 2.5


mm cap,


mm by


mm valve,


mm housing,


Training


a 5

and


trays


mm plas


an 11


Each


washer,


nm stem


investigator


a 6.5

Figure


placed


m by

8).


unas-


sembled


pieces


tasks


drain


ass


embly


and


gate


valve)


training


tray


There


were


training


tray

The


training


room

trays


used

were


for t

made


raining,


wood


one

and


for

had


each

seven


task.

differ


ent


compartments


task)


and


one


were


for


each


mm wide


component t


mm long


(see


part


Figure


Timing


devices


Each


experimenter


used


a digital


stop


watch


with


"split


timing"t


capability


measure


duration s


each


tasks.


Each


experimenter







69










,:




:.i~~~~ -.~ -,iw~, L~i
4~

> .:-. a -.


ti: 4 "


~ /
-d ~.
d:I>-- .r

-~l X j~ Ca
~~
-' -:*'
~yi~- J--i-: A;*
5- & ,gttt~'--

-. F:~
ft., ;
~r ~ ,tf#." <.







*; A







~-3 ~
1,t,\C, :.
4~~t








c.







S4-








-~ ,r0''i. ,





t-.F










'At~ir'
*:(

;0)















Ar b Ii ..I
2~n .,T fl- j ~I.*
h 1((V
"' "ir'F K>
IP *~""*'
1%.










r' *s -
'' :2: .
IeW~t



F,~~ ~ I.- 1!`""J;~1





"::
qJ
t.,g::~ ,"c -.
-~~v d Vt







S
3vtC

1~- -
L *
A-~ 7-'
-~

7






.







:c~~~~* *' I~Fj *~













p:
.J. **. *





















S 'JP ''t 'f%9ktnLw~
lf a I









Reinforcing


stimuli.


The


reinforcing


stimuli


used


each


subject


was


not


determined


until


subj ects


were


selected


inclusion


this


study


, since


reinforc-


stimuli


are


experimenter


specific


ected


individual.


a reinforcing


stimulus


When


based


preference


individual,


experimenter


had


empirically


effect tivenes s


reinforced


with


individual.


Experimental


Design


The


experimental


was


a multiple


-baseline


procedure


across s


individuals


which


include


first


four


subj ects


and


a direct


replication


(Sidman,


1960)


involving


such


a design,


four

each


other su

subject


objects.


was


Through


exposed


to each


use c

task,


under


specific


treatment t


condition


(i.e.,


backward


chaining


or total


k presentation).


The


basic


design


was


an A


BBA


BAA


Paradigm.


With


only


tasks


and


procedures


, four


subjects


were


needed


to equally


counterbalance


tasks


and


procedures.


order


see


experimental


effect


would


generalize


across


subjects,


four


more


subjects


were

there


added.

was a


generalization


L direct t


replication


phase


procedures


experiment,


use


with


first


four


subjects.


















.kr4
us

9(1


-3


mc




uco
*r%4Ch C
.0445
CO (2 U


SeC


-4
4J~1
00


C)


Cl
-4


(`h7








exp er imen tal


design.


Subjects


and


started


with


gate


valve


and


total


task


condition.


Similarly,


subjects


2 and


6 received


total


task


condition


but


with


drain


assembly.


Subjects


3 and


as well


subjects


and


started


with


backwar d


chaining


condition,


but


with


gate


valve


and


drain


assembly


, respectively


see


Figure


was


imp or tan t


that


investigator


alternated


procedures,


tasks,


subj ects


and


setting


equally


tha t


each


task


was


equally


counterbalanced


with


each


proc


edure


and


setting.


Figure


is a graphic


depiction


experimental


design.

received


Subjects


1 and


identical


2 and


treatment


3 and


and


condition.


and


chan


line


direction


(i.e.,


or down)


been


used


to indicate


a change


treatment t


condition.


breaks


line


are


not


to be


considered


changes


in condition


but


rather


as an end


trial


and


a beginning


a new


trial,


when


subject


remained


same


experimental


condition


(i.e. ,


subject t


finished


trial


with


drain


backward


cha in ing


condition


and


subj ec t


will


continue


nex t


trial


with


drain


backward


cha in ing


condition).


Dependent


Variables


dependent t


variables


study


were


four


. First









a subject


drain


assembly


with


backward


chaining.


Third


was


performance


a subject


on the


gate


valve


with


backward


chaining.


Fourth


was


performance


a subject


gate


valve


with


total


task


presentation.


Independent


Variable


There


were


independent


variab 1


The


first


independent


variable


was


experimenter


manipulation


backward


chaining


procedure


The


second


independent


variable


task


was


procedure.


investigator


both


s manipulation


procedures


total


exp er imen ter


changed


procedure


within


each


experimental


setting


and


within


each


experimental


task


see


Figure


. The


ves


tigator


completed


experimental


manipula tion


variable


that


each


task


was


equally


c oun ter -


balanced


with


each


procedure


In s trumen ta t ion


data


collection


form


for


each


task


was


signed


order


to facilitate


measurement


rate


acquisi-


tion


res


pective


tasks


total


task


pre


sent


tion


one


trial


was


total


ass


embly


task


(either


drain


assembly


or gate


valve)


backward


chaining,


one


trial


was


assembly


a specified


component


part


drain


assembly


or gate


valve.


The


data


collection

































CM
-I



N
rl
r-




0
-t4








0\














r-.











*r
*-t















































------ .m m-.milniu uemmm m -mm --m a.. mlm-u .- : -mmm m -m m




-I -- -- ---


- --- --




























- ---- ---m- -m -.mmniu -. m ---.---iu: :mlilal..llliimm alimll wmllmll









Data


Collection


There


were


parts


data


collection


system


s investigation.


First,


trainer


recorded


a duration


measure


.e.


time


spent


per


step)


each


step


each


task


and


placed


cells


corresponding


step s


task


Second,


trainer


also


recorded


a plus


or a minus


for


each


step


each


task


and


placed


cell


corresponding


steps


task.


repre


The


sents


form


was


step


a matrix


task,


on which


and


columns


row


repre-


sent


trials


(Tables


3 and


, respectively).


minus


was


given


when


trainer


had


to intervene.


self-


correction


procedure


was


not


used


nature


exp


eriment.


This


procedure


specified


work


Gold


Data


(197


Analysis


The


rates


acquisition


drain


assembly


and


gate


valve


each


subj ect


were


plotted


using


noncumulative


graphic


display


(Pennypacker


, Koenig,


Lindsley,


1972).


The


data


from


each


corresponding


trial


were


first


entered


trial


same


chart.


data


That


days


subj ec t


training


were


one


plotted


same


chart.


Subject


one


s second


trial


data


were


~~~~~~l~~,, 1+. A nl n 4aaaA


rnlts


St a a4--


+r 1 nCCn rf


,t,,, L


L U A A A ~ U A


'rn n









The


noncumula tive


records


were


subjected


to visual


inspec-


tion


primary


analytic


method


quanta tive


computer


analy


was


used


as a


supplemental


method


analyst


The


trends


data


from


task


task


and


procedure


proc


edure


were


on which


null


hypoth


eses


were


accepted


or rejected.


Celeration


was


measure


that


was


use


assess


behavior


chan


with


regard


to acqui


sition


task s


been


change


show


since


behavior


us in


diff


measure


ected


basic


change


erent


use


unit


(Pennypacker


procedure


assess


measurement


et al


Celebration


behavior


used


., 1972)


These


data


were


displayed


as di


stributions


on a logarith-


mic


scal


The


1 ogarithmic


scale


aided


interpretation


because


assi


in normal


zing


display


data













CHAPTER I

RE SULT S


The


results


Chap ter


analysis


chapter


divided


data


into


are


maj or


presented


sections


which


correspond


hypotheses


difference


hypotheses

es between


study.


celebrations


trials


to criterion


were


examined


subject t


performance


with


backward


chaining


procedure


and


total


task


presentation.


Hypothes


first


hypothesis


differences


between


cele-


rations


were


examined


task


training


performance


curves


when


backward


chaining


presentation


total


task


presentation


were


used


teach


a complex


vocational


task


a severe


profoundly


retarde


person.


Celeration


is defined


chan


in frequency


per


unit


time


numb


movements/


minute

that


e/week

there


(Pennypacker


were


et al.,


no differences


197


between


hypothesis

celebrations


was


tra in ing


performance


curves.


The


data


hypoth


esis


one


were


analyzed


three


dif-


feren t


proce


sses.


The


first


process


was


a comparison


family


celebrations,


both


intrasubjec t


and


intersubject,


correct


responding


and


incorrect


responding


see


Figures


** a


I

























* *,


- r.-.-
,i~~~~ :t, :


*1*
I -


- ~ -


-. z

- -
V ;ZZA


----4


*fr :


-. -~ -.


- -


I.

t"*.
+- -

11:

I e:
is "~


* ~- ~ -


- '
I



.- ~-


I

t.




-


JI.-


(1w


-


in.:


C:- it:Il- :t



1 -
i.-.. -- .


---

~~ ,- ,








.. ~.- ..~.-
4.--- -


itS ~ - .
ill
U.
I'
-~
- -4--.--- -


r*-t-*


- I- .-~


4,.-. L*,


- --.






K


-


w w- *
-- 4m
*M e w-* *




+m y *<'^ *
vpIT *


* -


* L..- .
-I. -- .-


-ji :


.. - .- A. .m .. -

+ -- + ----- -I .
": I -,.-.


-^& ,_ ^- ^ %
-ia *-.,-- ^ ,- 1- f -- t
^^ k ~r ...-- .. .. iiu ~ iii^iiiiiiiiiiiu t ...- .... f ._ > 9 ^ I -- -* -
.T l ~u......-u......-.-- ,- .- .11"-i- --* ***-

_ _*'" T7 I : 7 7 ^ .-- ^ -, 1 ._ _. t .


-I.---.'


$- ~ --- ,


-Itf.


- :- i -




., -. .
*: :*. ? r
.^ ^*.


.0


-I.

-- -
may... p.4 us .. ^
4^ w -* 111 iiiii v ^
Im 4


I
f/---------;



jf U
- -- -






- -7-l


~1*0


tO










Ct






t; I
I-


.- -I - ,- -


6
,it -


'"


" ""


i


- -


--*4 wf *-


1


I-


t:::
- i
~-
'(''
r -


.. .I,..-


M


,,


f--:----


x


-+

























I-


d)LIE Pt UIINUOJ-


- c,


--- -
Cv;


-- -


6'
-4


-4 .- -


-. --


- ----


IL


-~1 -

4,1'


- t



..... T _


--4--- --4-



ik ~ ~ -- -- -k -


1'



- -----4 i
---4-
-'-4-4-.
~ ~ ~ ~ -4---
~~ ~~~*-r


..,- -4--
- 4 --- -- 4..-+


t--r


- -


-C---
--4.-


L-I-44 -4
--4


~-4--


v^ ^- ,4-, .-- -. ^ '
---4 I.. -4----

--4-- -----.--*t -

--- '--

--4- I i-- -


- -


-- --- -
-.~ ~ ~ ~~~~~- 44 ---.J.4--- -4- 4-
**.--4--44 --- -- --- -- --
-~ -4---t-4.-~-4 4- --4-- --- -


t193


----- I -


-4--





r


I --(.


--- -h -r
--4-- --.t.-- 7 -- .
------ -----4tl-(: ---4-.-- -4--t44

-'-4-4-4- -. -- --4

*-'tcf -4 1*-~


-I -
-4* -4 --
-4- -4
---4
__ A
- -4. -


--,--4_-- -- -- 4--N.----- --y
+ -- --m **' ---4 -}-
-

S- ----- "
-f --- .. -
- T I --- 4- --4--,-

.- 4*- -4 *- '- 4-^- 4.-- _


-----4---


-4- ----- -- *

S 1.
-- --4-4

-- -- -


*1




4








~1


1--- --
--4

-- 4

- --4-4-- -~-~----- .-
- *---~------f---.-.~---.- --4- -


-- 44-,4,


S- 4r -
4 *


--- 4 -4 ~ -4 ~ 4--~--


- _-- -
,, ,-6
+ t

"+v


1


C *, -


-4'

it
U'


_: I


-----


+,


rrh


-----1-


::


-i-r-









indices


investigator


also


compared


total


responding


all


subjects


each


procedure


(see


Figure


, panels


and


The


third


procedure


was


a comparison


correct


and


incorrect t


time


responding


individual


backward


chaining


each


received


procedure


pair


total


was


trials


task


first


(i.e.,


presentation


pair)


first


and


subject


see


Figures


and


From


an analysis


Figure


evident


that


total


task


proc


edure


had


a larger


effect


on correc t


responding


than


did


backward


chaining


procedure.


celebrations


for


backward


cha in ing


procedure


were


only


superior


celebrations


total


task


procedure


five


cases


possibi


cases


. 9


Subject


trial


, Subject


trial


and


Subject


, trial


and


Subject


s correct


total


task


celebrations


shown


Figure


panel


were


,x 1


.16,


, and


xl1


.25.


Her


backward


chaining


celebrations


were


,x 1


.27,


and


x 1.30.


Subj ec t


s correct


responding


under


total


procedure


(panel


ranged


from


ax 1


to ax 1.66.


Her


correct


responding


under


backward


chaining


procedure


ranged


between


- 1.17


and


axl


.17.


Subject


s correct


total


task


celebration


shown


Figure


panel


were


.49,


x 1.49


, x 1.52


and


x 1.65




























-


r;fli jNlrflJ-


.-----"--- -A


-V -- %- -- .--~.U-rr -

- ----- f a. s .. ________


4 -

-J- 1.-- t


J


r#v- --


- -- -
* 4


--U-
-_ -- +- ^ _._ .


S+---- -
-
* 1 '-

-~-4
--- ~ ~ .-- -----.--- --'
L-..-~~ -ic- -a .-


--' -'^ -- ---- -------- ---- -


_~_- ~- t----4--- -

~~- -


0 -~

-----


-- +--


W)T~I_

~?"




(---
\- -, _-
p .









+ + -


- -~~ -.--.-I-

-- ; -- 4 i s .--.- -
------ ----- -- --

-- -



- r -----*----- .





i4 ZIT t

-~ ----"_.--"-- -
------- --

~ Ce rjz-----------'--- -


I *
- -4 ---- -1


-
-- -
4


- -I It .


S-.-- .
+. Jarllrt *T rrr-


- .---- -- -


II
4-
t


-: 17;


- -r-
- -


-^ A 1


'I '


,-' -1 --1

S- -
fa m + -|


- -


- -
-1 .


- -


IFKWJ l-I


^I










3
s~i

^'A-


~ r


---~-


i-


i





~I


cn'F


































(N


Irulc tjNt lN1if3e.'b.


- i


- I


I f -

- -i .
Io




!L
if.
*-
'- -if if

if. ifif --
+- 1
if i



,ififi ifif m


'C~

-FIT:


4- if if--- if ;.- if t:
ii_ i -.


-i 4~i if fifii---- I
i f if
+i-i- ifi- f.
if:f'$if -
*if f -- f--. ---- if i

if i if- if f- if -~i ---i if J i if
if if~fifif


~If.. if
- -- -----if--*. -.- ,, -->--
* - if *i- -if- if -
if-. .-- 4* tifif-~ ~ -
*.. ifif if-. 4'* *ififiif-fri --


-L 1.-i-. f '-
-. if -if-
4 -if- -. __.


-- i f ^-i -- i ,--- I -, -H ^ I ^ H I 111111 -ii iii t "- ^f- If -r ---
*ififiiff -~ (.- if i-if ~fi fiii*i f- --'f
- -i i i -- ~ ~ fi'iiifiifif- -i


ifif ififfifii ifiififf' if i if.--- C' ''' i


-l .ifif --if' .' ,: :i f c* .iiff.fiffi


if -i -




-.,. r----c- -- -


J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i f if --f if if if,* if V^ I"if- -
if ifiifiiffiffiifi i -M *^i if^ ( ,,
l df- w--, 0 4 -- -4---



if if iff i f f f---11 -ii
if if -u ^. if_ -L .i -" -J "' if -. if -


:z:I' : 't.if. r r z -- -- if -_ _- -_ ifI -^ __
^^ ^ .. F '** *lii :- *: *^*-^ n-i im t *f ij..^ i~f:* -i^^riiin111fififif ififif* if n 11i- -- -- ifi '-if----i-- if--ifi u ini-fin ^if- f ifn- -_ if i I* .TI *t -if*..*


-_ 4 if -* -. -* *- B .- ~ if ~ 'f"' *f ------ -i f- 4---- '- j-1 ---- --*l --^- B *V-.- -. --* -*.4 -ifif if ~ifii i if if i- -if-- riifi if. *---*
-^^ I iff*i -. iff i f--- I B '-.ifv l if i -.if* if if .1f if if if if- --- ii ,i -r if .- f i- -if- j-I-if iiin ifif- if -4- -^if.
^- i- .- if if- ---if *-..- -t---- *- --,* -i -- --- ,. _. -. --, _- if *
-9 i i -f i -- -1--- --if-- .- --* *-. -^ r--- - S- i -- .4 if











if 4 ,- 'if l-i if m i- 1 l i if 11 1 | 11- -
if- ifi -i-
4 ife m





L A r 1.. .1 -- ''r -***ii f L .l:> _._ if-. -, -.._... ... -if-... ...._. .__ '- -.. 4 -__ ..-_.... ..... ..
I .- f ^- /- & s 4 4 -- .I f '

~- -i -- i- i --if in .. if- i-i-i if-i 1 &ri111 i- if 'i .--- l.i-.-.. i-i-iii



-, i- f-ift- -- -- *_ ^i^ --^-^ -7^x~^" T~ --^ ifr"''"""' '-r
-- -Itf if --*-




I -. -- ~- f 1 -I ..-. ,. t *""T "
I*'^^W-lO -. l4'-1 1---ll-- lf-,-*-i-l-ifl---
I Na i f -









---- --- .-.- -.. if... i -- 1 ... ..- ^ ^^ ..4 ._ ...., ^ R^m ^ r ..i.. ,.4 ^ ^......r if ifi -_. if |f rr1 -if j i i f f ---- ,i|f^ if.- aififi,,_ir *iffif fi.i if ^ *if i

g,., ^ if -i f-. -- *-if -f If. i *- if -i f i fi V ". if- f il '- ifi -.4-if if f1 4.111.ifffi if ifr -111111 -- ffffi i -- if ifi *-
S -if-- 1------ -.-




if1, -if if -fiff if -_ i if if-i f .. -* ii --f if if -c *-- -. .iiiff if if-i ,11111111111 ** i* -- 4 .

S- i-- -.. 4--- f if- -----------i1f

if t if i if iffffii I, L .i '^' -"~ -. iff i if" -~~~ ^. ^ .:^ ._- "^ -i i f -r i f^ if -^ -"" -n 'i -T1 if ififi i fr** ~~ '" T if -*

fi f -fiii* fffi f i f f if--- :-- ^ "; ---~-i f fi fi fi if-if~^ if ,- -i 111 if -7 -^ fff -- f i f fi f fi ^ ^-,--., ^ 2-if ,,- -- if,, f if- i J- -
if, if-- ,- i -if -~ if^^ -ir-* 1 11 1 11 ifc-i i f i f-n if- -i ^-^ i f ifffii i **rr .....f- _- '^ T-

^a -- ... -, .- if *i if ^ -i-f. ,4-i.^ -* 1- ifffi if ^- *i if if if -. -if-. if 111111 _" *' -A^^-H -.
Ct6if f--fi fI------ f -u 4 fiff.



-fif if if- -

E:~e:
if ..- i i i-ififififif mi _. -| if i fi f iffiiifif iif i -_ V f1 ifi I --r r.i -,* *- -if- .* *if -11 n, ^- if._._ _. if1i i f. 1r~
*I*i-^ ^ ** -**- 4 *l *' i" -- **W'hV-M- i- il rll* --I >- M l -'-l f- 4" ^' ^^ ^'-- .- ^- 4i-i *1 -** if (
,. ._..* .-. --J hif ^- if i if F 'Tifi f**-._. i fifif.. --- ---------- .. ....._ i fc i ^ -i ififif i,_: r _i 'if ^ -^ -_ '__ nifi -




if if_ if if, ___ if if if if if i^ i if -_fi _f ii
~ ~ ~ i if if if if if* *i.i ifiii l-: I.Jni -i ififllll Si *-*-r if** --** m n -- urifif if if- **1:--Fi--kr***** *-*-fif- 4 -- -- ilcJ -- -- ^ 'K^-- ----b -.. -* -*

if if '- i j i f if. W- if 4 .. _if [ if ifif if'* -i if iffiiif-- if^ x if. i- if*'4 -i i if 11 .1-111111 mf ifi-iif if ffffffff .ifif -, -. r- -- iffi- :-1 ,- -: *I i
if ifif.^ if I^ ^ r I ^ -- ^-j -J -- -i^- *'^ ^- ^ if if i i if ^ fi f- --* '* fifnif -^* i' -n -
if\ if" --- --- L /- if "1 *"- ---- ** -- ** >-- --' '4 *ifiii if Jif if --i *iffi i -iffiiffii--ifif ifiifif
'i- 1 -f if -if *' if -- .-". if- .,_ if c.. ififA-iI ifi_. i --- if if if. -i-.. 1 if* -- -^ -
if -if- ^-- i-^ if ifiiini --* l q, ^. if ifif 4.k--Fk-' .,-11 1 -jf ififi fi i- if f-. -- -if- if-if i if^ _
pj -I- t. i if-.- .--.. -4' **-" *- -^^^ *~" tz:I h--- ftf/fli-- T if *^-^ if ** .-swF : .-_jk *.-
II ill 11 iif -if1.if 1.1 iir if* -- ^ -if ifiif ififif11.11ifif1 1 1i111 n infl if*i i Pifi "if-- f 1if***^ i --- -- if -.1 i i r i w -
u\ if i +eff* i if i ff-

+i if if ff
-e i fi
L'"~"" ~~'I~_".- "1~ *"'e+


H
(r4JU

(UcJ






C"-,

ci.


H


CU.J


wfh

4-4.0
0


- -f if -if if -fi -fi if

if
*i --


i if.4 i i


- -i----- ^ ----
V* if 4 if -
*. -. if if I -


i- ~ ~ if-- ---if-if-


e
r l-- r *ll-if -fifif -- ifi if if'. -if if -i.f--- ififji---4,----I---1-- _-- -.i
4- if if^ yi fi fi if --- _- -if ..-* f 4 if if -- if -IH-- <- -1if --111ifrif-ififi*- *Ni* -*r .. if- -i <- i--
if- W *- i f^ i if- --if li *~ i* if-m- ^*- hr- if if if -w-ifi if ifi -f ~f ifi 4i if -*-** ifif if'^ 4
.-- .*..i f- ^ ^ x* if*ififififififi ifj 4' 'ififi ifi iff- if -ii ifiifi ifii *111 if-if if *ifififi -
1 J T k i- | ,-r. i if if_ if if ij f,* fH if- -_ ifiiffi -*. 1if if i
fiff ~-rt if 'i f -- if if ifi if If- if --ffi : -: --
-- i f --- -
if^ i -.-: ^ ~ if. if -if- if I f ifi f^ T .- -> 'i -ifif if i-i-i- t
y i i-. -_ ifj if if if- '
if -- rf Li if--if A4 ifi if i if if-i *iiff -if I if-- iffi if ifii
bf, '..--if, if-- i ififi1 *ifif i f if.* -if if. if i .









O Z:" L m
if f i iiff -if ,, -, if 7 I if i, i f 11 i
*^ >-4 -- .* -> -*ififff ififi i f -- 4'* **.i if -.- :if ** if if if - -- if -i
j *r~~i ** *i-w*- ..~~~ .>< : *f- -- -- -- *- *- -*..- 1 if*. -.* ** t if if
.- i >- -.. if* if if if if if J >. -* *. t '- -if if
^ k^ j^ ^- 'i -ifi -4 ifffiii if f *i f f f f f f* i fif if if if ifif *ifr fififif if if if

0 if* i if--S .
-" J. -


3fnlbm U3d INfOO'


- -- 4iiifiii-iiij if if -I if i f|r T-
'- ---*- if 1 f If 1111fi iI -I -- ..*; I--- --- i- .4 - -^ ^, ., ->- Iln --
.-i -if -'if --- -i----if- __-- ,if-, .-
ififiififeifif - -if if- -


: :- -
I i


If if- If


w


























A'


2o tb.d nri: t CO-*-


-.- -



L -~-#--- -


ft


- -- ~ &-


i -
- - - -


aI-


-- ~- s-


V.

-


1 ---- `

,

- .-r


A---I-- *

- 4* -


--I---


- --..--s. -


4 + -



w + -


-t: ---v -, -
-r-r L-T~- -/


\'- 4-.-- --


**
4.,,..



- -.- .



-:~


If?
r$


______ L

~ ~~ .-1 --- --
~ ~ I --4----

- ~ -- -c
-- ------ ---. ---. .- I- -- -

~ ~-*- -- .4 -.
-~~~~~~ -:----~-- ~ -~~&A--





-- ~ 3 --- ----



-- -




---4."- .- r i -- -


4L -


--Z- -- -:
---


4---- ---- --


-.:I ,-- -


.tt -

~I 71 -

U - --- -
*
4 -
4- -4
-- -----.-----.---- -
-



~1~*~


-- --
-- --I:-~'


1 rr-r


- -


- --- 1~


it
- +-L






- .- .
6
+- +
** v-


* ,M -------- .- --____ ______-_

In -




-.


-
'~~ m m *

w +: a


_~_


- I! i ~:


--


je


----:-


V:-


acdC






a)


0






U C






k r4



Sa




OW












rHH


Ol





























Ir -'


-c ._ _
a i


CP N


IT 7

tL~ Z~


*:I .
4 -4---


1- -- -.- -


4.---

- -* *--`~


:*-
-4--a --4


-,
*"
*,


* -
a ^w-


*rr --4 .-"
* -~





.-
.- -


..-. ---


- I


4z






I// .1






4i -


QA







a).


-- ->---- --:- ---- r.. -.-
+ - -


I-(----4--- --- .
+ x ^ --.- -
mm .'~ '' +^^ L .
+e ~-


-4-- -
p1+1>.- z42


- C- -*-r -


--






- -1----- -4---


* ..-
I-


---A--t


-- -
-- 4


* i-" ---- -

-.--. -- 4

4-


- -. ~ --


C- A..-- --



ii-
-(~* -* -

----l~t------ Vr h--- -


-- ^*


\ -- /-- **-
sa e* .^e -.i.>



\----- -

*, -~ -
A~~~ v ++ -* *
* .9 ^- ^ e + -" -
nec. .
--- a 4
+e e s w


---4


- -


-. -l -
E"'
maneillpe m e


4-


*r4



C"c


*-14.- --
--*-f *----
':~~~ ~ *-- --v -- -
+ :+ --- --- a


--r c-1



-- -. ----- ------


--


11 ~-- 4- -- .

: ^ I



-i
--

* --.- -U-


- 9 -. -*.------ -* -.
- -.-
4 *-

- - -.



Wt -v-.-- -~- -.


fl41


' --., *
flz~t1 11%


-

+@A mm


fr
'ito
0


1


__


I_


I


..


-I


a 3





















I


* - -
V W anua -- --* w- -- -


-t- --.- -


~.,.~i---*


r --
r v"-r-
:ttr.
- -


- .-~- -









*


rCo

Cd


I 1 .


It-


+ -


71


.---- b





7 :I'. _ __:~


-~~ .- ----- -


-.- -4-


- i-


'I/-;


1"-


'J--


El -


* I


I
-4-


C)





CJIU
Oa





sIra

0(1








cIrZ
~Ctj



0'-


V


-D\
JA


~--* -~S~--


*~**


,,,


i~


1


~_-


1









Subject


correc t


celebrations


total


task


pre-


sensation,


Figure


, panel


were


x l


.72,


x 2.70,


x 2.38,


and


2.12.


His


correct t


celebrations


backward


chain-


procedure


were


, x 1


.21,


x 1.33,


and


x l


From


an observation


Figur e


, panel


evident


that


Subject


correct


performance


under


either


condition


did


not


differ


greatly


His


total


task


celebrations


ranged


from


x l


to x 1.36.


His


backward


chaining


celebration


ranged


from


x 1


to x 1.30.


Subjec t


celebrations


, Figure


panel


, had


a wider


range


than


Subjec t


correct


celebration


correct


cele-


rations


total


task


procedure


ranged


from


xl1


.64.


His


correct


celebrations


backward


chaining


procedure


ranged


from


x 1.08


to x 1


.57.


Subject


s correct


celebrations


total


task


pro-


cedure


, Figure


panel


were


x l


, x 1.54


x l


, and


x 1.17.


Her


correct


eel


rations


backward


cha in ing


procedure


were


x 1.02,


1.10,


and


+ 1.16.


Subject


s correct


celebrations


Figure


, panel


had


widest


range


subjects.


Her


correct


celebration


under


total


task


procedure


ranged


from


x 1.62


to x 3


Her


correct


backward


chaining


celebrations


ranged


from


- 2.62


1.5


observed


from


an analysis


Figure


that


neither