The Use of Matrix Training to Teach Color-Shape Tacts to Children with Autism
Matrix training consists of preplanning instruction by arranging components of desired skills across a minimum of two axes. In the current study, three matrices were developed for each participant (e.g., Matrix 1, Generalization Matrix 1, and Generalization Matrix 2) with known color and shape components. Following baseline, nonoverlapping (i.e., diagonal) training was conducted with Matrix 1. Results of posttests were used to determine the extent of emergence of untrained color-shape combinations across all matrices. Results from all six participants indicated that mastery criteria were eventually met for Matrix 1. For five participants, mastery criteria were also eventually met for generalization matrices. Results replicate findings from prior studies and offer a simple approach for both testing emergence of untrained skills and remediating responding.
KeywordsAutism Matrix training Recombinative generalization Tact Verbal behavior
The study was conducted at the Marcus Autism Center and Emory University and was supported by a grant from the Marcus Core Pilot Funding Award.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors have no declared financial conflicts of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained for all individuals in the study.
- Axe, J. B. (2016). Combining concepts from verbal behavior and derived relational responding produces efficient language instruction for children with autism. Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 9(3), 106–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/17489539.2016.1153813 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Carr, J. E., & Miguel, C. F. (2013). The analysis of verbal behavior and its therapeutic applications. In G. J. Madden (Ed.), APA handbook of behavior analysis (Vol. 2). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
- Dixon, M. R. (2014). The PEAK relational training system: Direct training module. Carbondale, IL: Shawnee Scientific Press.Google Scholar
- Esper, E. A. (1925). A technique for the experimental investigation of associative interference in artificial linguistic material. Language Monographs, 1, 5–46.Google Scholar
- Fenson, L., Marchman, V. A., Thal, D. J., Dale, P. S., Reznick, J. S., & Bates, E. (2007). MacArthur–bates communicative development inventories: User’s guide and technical manual (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.Google Scholar
- Goldstein, H., & Brown, W. H. (1989). Observational learning of receptive and expressive language by handicapped preschool children. Education and Treatment of Children, 12, 5–37.Google Scholar
- Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (Eds.). (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York, NY: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
- Karlan, G. R., Brenn-White, B., Lentz, A., Hodur, P., Egger, D., & Frankoff, D. (1982). Establishing generalized, productive verb-noun phrase usage in a manual language system with moderately handicapped children. The Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 47, 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshd.4701.31 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- LaFrance, D. L., & Miguel, C. F. (2014). Teaching language to children with autism spectrum disorder. In P. Sturmey, J. Tarbox, D. R. Dixon, & J. L. Matson (Eds.), Handbook of early intervention for autism spectrum disorders: Research, practice, and policy (pp. 403–436). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
- Leaf, R., & McEachin, J. (1999). A work in progress: Behavior management strategies and a curriculum for intensive behavioral treatment of autism. New York, NY: DRL Books.Google Scholar
- Leblanc, L. A., Miguel, C. F., Cummings, A. R., Goldsmith, T. R., & Carr, A. E. (2003). The effects of three stimulus-equivalence testing conditions on emergent US geography relations of children diagnosed with autism. Behavioral Interventions, 18(4), 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.144 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Light, P., Watson, J., & Remington, B. (1990). Beyond the single sign: The significance of sign order in a matrix-based approach to teaching productive sign combinations. Mental Handicap Research, 3, 161–178. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3148.1990.tb00034.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lovaas, O. I. (2002). Teaching individuals with developmental delays: Basic intervention techniques. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
- Rehfeldt, R. A., & Barnes-Holmes, Y. (2009). Derived relational responding applications for learners with autism and other developmental disabilities: A progressive guide to change. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.Google Scholar
- Remington, B., Watson, J., & Light, P. (1990). Beyond the single sign: A matrix-based approach to teaching productive sign combinations. Mental Handicap Research, 3, 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3148.1990.tb00079.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rutter, M., Bailey, A., & Lord, C. (2003). SCQ: The social communication questionnaire. Torrance, CA: Western Psychological Services.Google Scholar
- Striefel, S., Wetherby, B., & Karlan, G. R. (1978). Developing generalized instruction-following behavior in severely retarded people. In C. E. Meyers (Ed.), Quality of life in severely and profoundly mentally retarded people: Research foundations for improvement (pp. 267–326). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Deficiency.Google Scholar
- Sundberg, M. L., & Partington, J. W. (1998). Teaching language to children with autism or other developmental disabilities. Pleasant Hills, CA: Behavior Analysts.Google Scholar
- Watson, P. J., & Workman, E. A. (1981). The non-concurrent multiple baseline across-individuals design: An extension of the traditional multiple baseline design. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 12(3), 257–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7916(81)90055-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar