Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

, Volume 35, Issue 6, pp 839–850 | Cite as

Teaching Children with Autism when Reward is Delayed. The Effects of Two Kinds of Marking Stimuli


Three children with autism were taught to identify pictures of emotions in response to their spoken names. Their speed of acquisition was compared using a within-child alternating treatments design across three teaching conditions, each involving a 5 second delay to reinforcement. In the marked-before condition, an instruction encouraged the children to visually orient to the cards before they made their choice response; in the marked-after condition, an attention-eliciting verbal cue (e.g., “Look!”) was delivered after both correct and incorrect responses; in the delay condition, these marking cues were omitted. Performance in the no-cue control was inferior to both the marked-before and marked-after conditions, but the difference between the latter two conditions was not significant.


Applied behavior analysis associative learning attention delayed reinforcement discrete-trial training response marking 



Corinna F. Grindle and Bob Remington, Centre for Behavioural Research, Analysis, and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, School of Psychology. The first author was supported during this research by a grant from the Economic and Social Research Council. The authors express their appreciation to the families who participated in this study and also gratefully acknowledge the help of the staff at Charter school, Chippenham, who generously provided facilities and support for the research.


  1. Badia P., Culbertson S., Harsh J., (1973). Choice of longer or stronger signalled shock over shorter or weaker unsignalled shockJournal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 19: 25–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barlow D. H., Hayes S. C., (1979). Alternating treatments design: One strategy for comparing the effects of two treatments in a single subjectJournal of Applied Behavior Analysis 12: 199–210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baron-Cohen S., (1997). Mindblindness. An essay on autism and theory of mind. London, England: The MIT pressGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown R., Kulik K., (1977). Flashbulb memoriesCognition 5: 73–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burack J. A., (1994). Selective attention deficits in persons with autism-preliminary evidence of an inefficient attentional lensJournal of Abnormal Psychology 10: 535–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. DeLeon I. G., Iwata B. A., (1996). Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferencesJournal of Applied Behavior Analysis 29: 519–533PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dunn, L. I. M., Dunn, L. M., Whetton, C., & Burley, J., (1997). The British Picture Vocabulary Scale (2nd ed.) (BPVS-II). Windsor, Berks: NFER-NelsonGoogle Scholar
  8. Green, G., (1996). Early behavioral intervention: What does research tell us? In C. Maurice, G. Green & S. Luce (Eds.), Behavioral intervention for young children with autism: A manual for parents and professionals (pp.29–44). Austin, Texas: Pro-edGoogle Scholar
  9. Gresham F. M., MacMillan D. L., (1997). Autistic recovery? An analysis and critique of the empirical evidence on the early intervention projectBehavioral Disorders 22: 185–201Google Scholar
  10. Grice G. R., (1948). The relation of secondary reinforcement to delayed reward in visual discrimination learningJournal of Experimental Psychology 38: 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Grindle C. F., Remington B., (2002). Discrete-trial training for autistic children when reward is delayed: A comparison of conditioned cue value and response markingJournal of Applied Behavior Analysis 35: 187–190PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Grindle, C. F. & Remington, B., Teaching children with autism using conditioned cue-value and response marking procedures: A socially valid procedure. Research in Developmental Disabilities 25: 413–429PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Higbee T., Carr J. E., Harrison C. D., (1999). The effects of pictorial versus tangible stimuli in stimulus-preference assessmentsResearch in Developmental Disabilities 20: 63–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Higbee T., Carr J. E., Harrison C. D., (2000). Further evaluation of the multiple-stimulus preference assessmentResearch in Developmental Disabilities 21: 61–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hull C. E., (1943). Principles of behaviour. New York. Appleton-Century CroftsGoogle Scholar
  16. Jay A. S., Grote I., Baer D. M., (1999). Teaching participants with developmental disabilities to comply with self-instructionsAmerican Journal on Mental Retardation 104: 509–522PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jordan, R., Jones, G., & Murray, D. (1998). Educational interventions for children with autism: A literature review of current research (Department for Education and Employment Research Report. No. 77). Norwich. UK. Crown CopyrightGoogle Scholar
  18. Kazdin A. E., (1982). The token economy: A decade laterJournal of Applied Behavior Analysis 15: 431–445PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lieberman D. A., (1972). Secondary reinforcement and information as determinants of observing behaviour in monkeys (Macca mulatto)Learning and Motivation 3: 341–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lieberman D. A., McIntosh D. C., Thomas G. V., (1979). Learning when reward is delayed: A marking hypothesisJournal of Experimental Psychology 5: 224–242PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Lieberman D. A., McIntosh D. C., Thomas G. V., (1985). Marking in pigeons: The role of memory in delayed reinforcementJournal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 5: 224–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lovaas O. I., (1987). Behavioral treatment and normal educational and intellectual functioning in young autistic childrenJournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 55: 3–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lovaas O. I., (2003). Teaching individuals with developmental delays. Basic intervention techniques. Austin, Texas: PRO-EDGoogle Scholar
  24. Lovaas O. I., Freitag G., Kinder M. I., Rubenstein B. D., Schaeffer B., Simmons J. Q., (1966). Establishment of social reinforcers in two schizophrenic children on the basis of foodJournal of Experimental Child Psychology 4: 109–125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Matson J. L., Benavidez D. A., Compton L. S., Paclawskyj T., Baglio C., (1996). Behavioral treatment of autistic persons: A review of research from 1980 to the presentResearch-in-Developmental-Disabilities 17: 433–465PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McGee G. G., Morrier M. J., Daly T., (1999). An incidental teaching approach to early intervention for toddlers with autismJournal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps 24: 133–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. New York State Department of Health (1999). Report of the Recommendations. Autism/Pervasive Developmental Disorders. Publication No. 4215Google Scholar
  28. Noterdaeme M., Amorosa H., Hildenberger K., Sitter S., Minow F., (2001). Evaluation of attention problems in children with autism and children with a specific language disorderEuropean Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 10: 58–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Perkins C. C., (1947). The relation of secondary reward to gradients of reinforcementJournal of Experimental Psychology 37: 377–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schrier A. M., Thompson C. R., Spector N. R., (1980). Observing behavior in monkeys (Macaca arctoides) Support for the information hypothesisLearning and Motivation 11: 355–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Skinner B. F., (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Appleton-Century CroftsGoogle Scholar
  32. Stromer R., MacKay H. A., McVay A. A., Fowler T., (1998). Written lists as mediating stimuli in the matching-to-sample performances of individuals with mental retardationJournal of Applied Behavior Analysis 31: 1–19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Taylor I. O., Reilly M. F., (1997). Toward a functional analysis of private verbal self-regulationJournal of Applied Behavior Analysis 30: 43–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Thomas G. V, Lieberman D. A., McIntosh D. C., Ronaldson P., (1983). The role of marking when reward is delayedJournal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 9: 401–411PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Thomas G. C., Robertson D., Lieberman D. A., (1987). Marking effects in Pavlovian Trace ConditioningJournal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 2: 126–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thomas G. C., Robertson D., Lieberman D. A., (1990). The effects of relative intensity of cue and marker on marked trace conditioning in pigeonsThe Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 42B: 267–287Google Scholar
  37. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (1999). Children and mental health. In Mental Health: A Report of the surgeon general. Retrieved Dec 2, 2003, from Scholar
  38. Wainwrightsharp A., Bryson S., (1993). Visual orienting deficits in high-functioning people with autismJournal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 25: 1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Williams B. A., (1994). Conditioned reinforcement: Neglected or outmoded explanatory constructPsychonomic Bulletin and Review 1: 457–475Google Scholar
  40. Wolfe J. B., (1934). The effect of delayed reward upon learning in the white rat Journal of Comparative Psychology 17: 1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wyckoff L. B., (1952). The role of observing responses in discrimination learning Part I Psychological Review 59: 431–422PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of PsychologyUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  2. 2.School of PsychologyUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations