Thematic Matching as Remedial Teaching for Symbolic Matching for Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Matching-to-sample (MTS) is often used to teach symbolic relationships between spoken or printed words and their referents to children with intellectual and developmental disabilities. However, many children have difficulty learning symbolic matching, even though they may demonstrate generalized identity matching. The current study investigated whether training on symbolic MTS tasks in which the stimuli are physically dissimilar but members of familiar categories (i.e., thematic matching) can remediate an individual's difficulty learning symbolic MTS tasks involving non-representative stimuli. Three adolescent males diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder were first trained on symbolic MTS tasks with unfamiliar, non-representative form stimuli. Thematic matching was introduced after the participants failed to learn 0, 2 or 4 symbolic MTS tasks and before additional symbolic MTS tasks were introduced. After exposure to thematic matching, accuracy on symbolic MTS tasks with novel stimuli increased to above chance for all participants. For two participants, high accuracy (> 90%) was achieved on a majority of these sessions. Thus, thematic matching may be an effective intervention for students with limited verbal repertoires and who have difficulty learning symbolic MTS tasks. Possible explanations for the facilitative effect of thematic matching are considered and warrant further investigation.

Evidence for response membership in stimulus classes by pigeons.

Response membership in pigeons' stimulus-class formation was evaluated using associative symmetry and class expansion tests. In Experiment 1, pigeons learned hue-hue (AA) and form-form (BB) successive matching plus a modified hue-form (AB) task in which reinforcement was contingent upon a left versus right side-key response after the positive AB sequences. On subsequent BA (symmetry) probe trials, pigeons responded more often to the comparisons on the reverse of the positive than negative AB sequences and, more importantly, preferentially pecked the side key consistent with symmetry after the reversed positive sequences. In Experiment 2, the original three baseline tasks were supplemented by dot-white (CC) successive matching in which reinforcement was contingent upon a left versus right side-key response after the positive CC sequences. Class expansion was then tested by presenting nonreinforced CA and CB successive matching probes. Comparison response rates were mostly nondifferential on CA probes but were uniformly higher on CB probes that consisted of the C samples and B comparisons from the same, hypothesized class. Together, these results provide evidence that responses can become members of stimulus classes, as predicted by Urcuioli's (2008) theory of pigeons' stimulus-class formation and Sidman's (2000) theory of equivalence.

Reinforcer control by comparison-stimulus color and location in a delayed matching-to-sample task.

Six pigeons were trained in a delayed matching-to-sample task involving bright- and dim-yellow samples on a central key, a five-peck response requirement to either sample, a constant 1.5-s delay, and the presentation of comparison stimuli composed of red on the left key and green on the right key or vice versa. Green-key responses were occasionally reinforced following the dimmer-yellow sample, and red-key responses were occasionally reinforced following the brighter-yellow sample. Reinforcer delivery was controlled such that the distribution of reinforcers across both comparison-stimulus color and comparison-stimulus location could be varied systematically and independently across conditions. Matching accuracy was high throughout. The ratio of left to right side-key responses increased as the ratio of left to right reinforcers increased, the ratio of red to green responses increased as the ratio of red to green reinforcers increased, and there was no interaction between these variables. However, side-key biases were more sensitive to the distribution of reinforcers across key location than were comparison-color biases to the distribution of reinforcers across key color. An extension of Davison and Tustin's (1978) model of DMTS performance fit the data well, but the results were also consistent with an alternative theory of conditional discrimination performance (Jones, 2003) that calls for a conceptually distinct quantitative model.