ArticleThe Analysis of verbal behavior2019
Instructional Demonstrations are More Efficient Than Consequences Alone for Children with Naming.
Article in The Analysis of verbal behavior, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acquisition of Incidental Bidirectional Naming: Isolating the Effects of Probing and Mixed-Operant Instruction.The Analysis of verbal behavior · 2025Article
- Delayed Consequences in General Education through the Lenses of Delay Discounting and Verbal Behavior.The Analysis of verbal behavior · 2024Article
- An Experimental Comparison of In-Person and Remote Instruction for Preschoolers with Disabilities.Behavior analysis in practice · 2023Article
- The Establishment of Incidental Bidirectional Naming through Multiple Exemplar Instruction: a Systematic Replication.The Analysis of verbal behavior · 2023Article
- The Emergence of Bidirectional Naming Through Sequential Operant Instruction Following the Establishment of Conditioned Social Reinforcers.The Analysis of verbal behavior · 2020Article
- Verbal Development, Behavioral Metamorphosis, and the Evolution of Language.Perspectives on behavior science · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prior research found that without the naming cusp, children did not learn from instructional demonstrations presented before learn units (IDLUs) (i.e., modeling an expected response twice for a learner prior to delivering an instructional antecedent), however, following the establishment of naming, they could. The present study was designed to compare the rate of learning reading and mathematics objectives in children who showed naming using IDLUs compared to standard learn units (SLUs) alone (comparable to three-term contingency trials). In Phase 1, a pre-screening phase, we demonstrated that four typically developing males, 3 to 4 years of age, had naming within their repertoire, meaning they were able to master the names of novel 2-D stimuli as both a listener and a speaker without explicit instruction. Using the same participants in Phase 2, we compared rates of learning under two instructional methods using a series of repeated AB designs where conditions (IDLUs versus SLUs) were counterbalanced across dyads and replicated across participants. The participants learned more than twice as fast under IDLU conditions and showed between 30% and 50% accuracy on the first presentation of a stimulus following a model. The IDLU condition was more efficient (fewer trials to criterion) than the SLU condition. These findings, together with prior findings, suggest that the onset of naming allows children to learn faster when instructional demonstrations are incorporated into lessons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.