Behavior analysis of child development

Child development in behavior analytic theory has origins in John B. Watson's behaviorism.[1] Watson wrote extensively on child development and conducted research (see Little Albert experiment). Watson was instrumental in the modification of William James' stream of consciousness approach to construct a stream of behavior theory.[2] Watson also helped bring a natural science perspective to child psychology by introducing objective research methods based on observable and measurable behavior. Following Watson's lead, B.F. Skinner further extended this model to cover operant conditioning and verbal behavior. In doing this, Skinner's radical behaviorism focused the science on private events such as thinking and feeling and how they are shaped by interacting with the environment.[3][4] Bijou (1955) was the first to bring this approach to human children.[5][6][7]

Contents

History

In the 1960s, while at the University of Kansas in the home economics/family life department,[8] Sidney Bijou and Donald Baer began to apply behavior analytic principles to child development in an area referred to as "Behavioral Development" or "Behavior Analysis of Child Development".[9] Skinner's behavioral approach and Kantor's interbehavioral approach was adopted in Bijou and Baer's model. Bijou and Baer created a three-stage model of development (e.g., basic, foundational, and societal). In behavior analysis, the stages are neither essential nor explanatory.[10] They posit that these stages are socially determined, although behavior analysts tend to focus much more on change points or cusps (behavioral cusp) rather than stages.[11] While not all cusps result in a stage change, all stage changes do involve cusps.[12] In the behavioral model, development is represented as behavior change and is dependent on a combination of factors including the level/kind of stimulation, behavioral function, and the learning/genetic history of the organism.[13] This model is closer to Skinner's model than Watson's[14] in that it rejects the idea of a purely passive organism.[15] Behavior analysis in child development is between mechanistic[16] and contextual, pragmatic approaches.[17][18]

From its inception, the behavioral model has been focused on prediction and control of the developmental process.[19][20] The model focuses on analysis of a behavior and then attempts to prove the analysis by synthesizing the behavior.[21] The model was greatly enhanced by basic research on the matching law of choice behavior developed by Richard J. Herrnstein, especially in the study of reinforcement in the natural environment as related to antisocial behavior. As the behavioral model has become increasingly more complex and focused on metatheory,[22] it has become concerned with how behavior is selected over time and forms into stable patterns of responding.[23][24] A detailed history of this model was written by Pelaez.[25] In 1995, Henry D. Schlinger, Jr. provided the first behavior analytic text since Bijou and Baer comprehensively showed how behavior analysis—a natural science approach to human behavior—can be used to understand existing research in child development.[20] In addition, the Quantitative Behavioral Developmental Model by Commons and Miller is the first behavioral theory and research to address notion similar to stage.[26]

Research methods

The nature of the measurements is of critical importance to behavior analysts studying child development. The measurement categories can be and often are narrow such as smiling or out of seat[27] or broad response classes. The choice of issue to be studied has implications for both interval consistency and temporal stability of the measure. Gewirtz (1969) discussed that behaviors composing "trait" should show internal consistency, temporal stability, and even situational consistency, but only internal consistency would be expected for a behavior which is part of a response class.[28] In addition, response characteristics can also be the basis for a scoring system. For example, Goetz and Baer (1973) were assessing the uniqueness of children's block play.[29] The children in the study used quite different building strategies: (1) generating few, highly elaborate constructions; (2) many simple construction strategies; or (3) a mixture of (1) and (2). Thus a summary response score needed to be created weighing the number of responses, complexity, and uniqueness. This summary score was needed even though uniqueness was the primary focus of the study.

Behavior analytic models of child development use multiple research methods to adequately answer the posed research question. Graphical representation of data is considered crucial.[30] Single-subject research remains the hallmark of the approach with a longitudinal study follow up. Current research is focused on integrating single-subject designs through meta-analysis to determine the effect sizes of behavioral factors in development. Lag sequential analysis has become popular for tracking the stream of behavior during observations. Increasingly, groups designs have also been employed. Model construction research involves latent growth modeling to determine developmental trajectories and structural equation modeling, which determines the probabilities of venturing down specific paths. Rasch (1980) Analysis is now widely used to show sequentiality within a developmental trajectory.

One issue in methodology that was a particularly important discovery was the use of observational methods combined with lag sequential analysis to determine reinforcement in the natural setting.[31]

Quantitative Behavioral-Development

The Model of Hierarchical Complexity (MHC) is a quantitative behavioral-developmental theory that suggests an objective explanation for why stage-like performances are observed. The model proposes that stages result from the fact that tasks form a hierarchy from simple to more complex. A task is defined as hierarchically more complex when it organizes, in a non-arbitrary fashion, two or more less complex tasks. Using this model, fourteen orders of hierarchical complexity have been generated. These orders underlie Piaget’s four stages and also the half-stages. In addition, four post-formal stages are generated by the model. In this presentation, the model is used to generate stimuli (in the form of either problems or stories). The stimuli within a domain consist of an ordered series of tasks from the concrete order to the post-formal, systematic or in some cases, metasystematic order. Tasks were generated in several domains, including mathematical, scientific, moral, political, and other social domains. A Rasch analysis showed that items within each domain were well scaled on a single dimension reflecting the predicted difficulty of the item. Participants’ performances were shown to conform to the predictions of the model, with very high amounts of variance accounted for (from .73% and up).

Research

Contingencies, uncertainty, and attachment

An infant is born helpless into an uncertain world, and from its earliest moments, must rely on its parents for heat, food, water, and protection. The behavioral model of attachment recognizes the role of uncertainty and that infants have a limited repertoire for communicating its needs. Actions which produce responding on the parents' part are highly valued. Because of this, contingent relationships are at the very heart of behavior analytic theory.[32][33][34]

The importance of contingency appears to be highlighted in other developmental theories;[35] however, many traditional developmental psychologists fail to recognize that contingency needs to be determined by two factors.[36] These factors are not just the efficiency of the action but the efficiency of the act compared to all other acts that the infant may perform at that point. By learning these contingent relationships, infants and adults are able to function within their environment. In fact, research has shown that contingent relationships lead to more emotionally satisfying relationships.[37]

As early as the 1960s, behavioral research showed that parental responsiveness toward the infant on separation predicted identified outcomes in the "stranger situation" and modified versions of this preparation.[38] In one study, six 8- to 10-month-old infants participated in four test conditions. The study was a classic reversal design (see single-subject research) and assessed infant approach rate to a stranger. If attention was based on stranger avoidance, the infant avoided the stranger. If attention was placed on infant approach, the infant approached the stranger.[39]

Recent meta-analytic studies of this model of attachment based on contingency found a moderate effect size, which increased to a large effect size when the quality of reinforcement was considered.[40] Recent research on contingencies highlights the matching quality[41] and places it in the dyadic context.[42] In addition, such studies have shown that contingencies can affect the development of both pro-social and anti-social behavior.[32][43][44][45] Training parents to become sensitive to the function of children's behavior and to respond behaviorally has resulted in a large effect size.[46] Thus, attachment problems seem to be related to parents inadvertently reinforcing children to protest on separation.[33] Meta-analyic research supports the notion that attachment is operant-based learning.[47]

An infant's sensitivity to contingencies can be affected by biological factors. This, in conjunction with being placed in erratic environments which contain few contingencies, can set the child up to have conduct problems, and lack of contingencies in the environment can lead to depression (see Behavioral Development and Depression below).[48][49] Research continues to look at the effects of learning-based attachment on moral development, and has found that erratic use of contingencies by parents early in life can produce devastating effects later for the child.[50][51]

Motor development

Behavior analysts have held since the days of Watson that motor development represents a conditioning process. The argument is that crawling, climbing, and even the walking displayed by all typical infants represents conditioning of biologically pre-programmed reflexes. In this view, the nature end is represented by the innate respondent behavior (stepping) and these reflexes are environmentally conditioned through experience and practice. This position was criticized by maturation theorists. One point of criticism was that the stepping reflex for infants appeared to disappear and thus was not "continuous". While working from a slightly different theoretical model but using operant conditioning and opportunity to respond techniques, Esther Thelen was able to show that children's stepping reflex disappears as a function of increased physical weight but if infants are placed in water, it returns.[52][53] This offered a plausible model for the continuity of the stepping reflex and thus the progressive stimulation model of the behavior analysts.

Indeed, infants deprived of physical stimulation or the opportunity to respond were found to have delayed motor development.[54][55] Under conditions of extra stimulation, the motor behavior of these children rapidly improved.[56] One area of research has shown that treadmilling can be beneficial to children with motor delays including Down syndrome and cerebral palsy.[57] Research on opportunity to respond and the building of motor development continues today.[58][59][60]

The behavioral development model of motor activity has produced a number of techniques including operant-based biofeedback to facilitate development with success. Some of the stimulation methods such as operant-based biofeedback have been applied as treatment to children with cerebral palsy and even spinal injury successfully.[61][62][63][64] Brucker's group demonstrated that specific operant conditioning-based biofeedback procedures can be effective in establishing more efficient use of remaining and surviving central nervous system cells after injury or after birth complications as in cerebral palsy.[65][66] While such methods are not a cure and gains tend to be in the moderate range, they do show ability to enhance functioning.[67]

Imitation and verbal behavior

As early as the 1920s, behaviorists were studying verbal behavior.[68][69][70] Esper (1920) studied associative models of language,[71] which has evolved into the current language interventions of matrix training and recombinative generalization.[72][73] A comprehensive taxonomy of language for speakers was laid down by Skinner (1957)[74] and for the listener Zettle and Hayes (1989) with Don Baer providing a developmental analysis of rule-governed behavior.[75] Language learning according to Skinner (1957) depended on environmental variables, which are mastered by an active child through imitation (echoic behavior), practice, and selective reinforcement including automatic reinforcement.

B.F. Skinner was one of the first psychologists to take the role of imitation in verbal behavior as a serious mechanism for acquisition.[74] He identified the echoic as one of his basic verbal operants and postulated that verbal behavior was learned by an infant from a verbal community. Skinner's account takes verbal behavior beyond an intra-individual process to an inter-individual process. Of particular interest is that he even defined verbal behavior as "behavior reinforced through the mediation of others".[76] Skinner's book was replied to by Noam Chomsky.[77] Initial behavioral replies were late but included: (1) comments on Chomsky's lack of understanding of behaviorism and the concept of the response class;[78] (2) comprehensive reviews of the science and what still needs to be demonstrated;[79] (3) historical and linguistic looks at the debate to place it in context;[80] and (4) philosophy of science discussions for clarifying the differences.[81] Myths have developed around behaviorism, for example suggesting behaviorism rejects biology, even a cursory read of Skinner (1981)[82] shows that not to be the case. Four typical linguistic arguments all seem not to be valid: (1) the poverty of the stimulus; (2) negative feedback is negligible; and (3) input does not predict later output. Much of the research exposing these myths was reviewed in Moerk (1996) and readers are referred to that paper.[83]

Research has presented a compelling case that environmental factors are important in the acquisition of verbal behavior.[84][85] Observational learning and imitation play particularly important roles in language learning.[86][87] Research seems to support the notion that imitation is progressive[88] In general, research supports the three-term contingency patterns suggested by behavior analysts[89] In addition, reinforcement appears to have a role.[90] Meta-analysis has shown that there even seems to be a large role for corrections.[91] Meork (1994) conducted a meta-analysis of 40 studies and found substantial evidence that corrections played a role. From this work, corrections are not only abundant but contingent on the mistakes of the child.[92]

In the behavioral model, the child is prepared to contact the contingencies for "joining" the listener and speaker.[93] At the very core, verbal episodes involve rotation of speaker and listener exchanges between individuals and even within the same person.[94][95] These exchanges what has been termed the conversational units[96] and have been the focus of considerable research at Columbia's communication disorders department.

Conversational units may be one of the strongest measures of socialization in that they consists of verbal interactions in which each party in a turn-taking exchange is reinforced as both speaker and listener.[97] Chu (1998) demonstrated contextual conditions for inducing and expanding conversational units between children with autism and non-handicapped siblings in two separate experiments.[98] The acquisition of conversational units and the expansion of verbal behavior decrease incidences of physical "aggression" in the Chu study[98] and several other reviews suggest similar effects.[99][100][101] The joining of the listener and speaker progresses from listener speaker rotations with others as a likely precedent for the three major components of speaker-as-own listener—say so correspondence, self-talk conversational units, and naming.[102]

Development of self

Robert Kohelenberg and Mavis Tsai proposed a behavior analytic model to account for the development of the "self".[103] In their model, the self develops as a product of reinforcement of verbal behavior in three stages. In the first stage the child receives reinforcement for statements such as "I am hot", "I am hungry", etc. Through the process of abstracting (higher order stimulus control), the statement "I am" emerges. Through the reinforcement on many statements such as "I am", "I feel", and "I think", gradually the "I" abstracts out. This model has not received much research attention; however, it does explain various forms of psychopathology with difficulties in the emerging "self" such as insecurity, narcissistic personality disorders, borderline personality disorders, etc. It holds that the forms of pathology come from frequent invalidations of the above defined statements so that the "I" does not emerge.

The above model has created a unique treatment called functional analytic psychotherapy for such disorders.

Other behavior analytic models for personality disorders exist.[104] They trace out the complex biological–environmental interaction for the development of avoidant and borderline personality disorders. They focus on Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory, which states that some individuals are more or less sensitive to reinforcement than others. Nelson-Grey views problematic response classes as being maintained by reinforcing consequences or through rule governance.

Socialization

Studies in this area have focused on the extended pattern of using rewards for behavior over time. The model focuses on two levels: micro- and macro-analysis. The "micro-analysis" level focuses on moment-to-moment interactions while a "macro-analysis" does so with parenting variables. Over the last few decades, longitudinal studies have supported the idea that contingent use of reinforcement and punishment over extended periods of time lead to the development of pro-social,[105] as well as anti-social behavior.[106][107] Midlarsky and colleagues (1973) used a combination of modeling and reinforcement to build altruistic behavior.[108] At least two studies exist in which modeling by itself did not increase pro-social behavior;[109][110] however, modeling is much more effective than instruction-giving such as "preaching".[111][112] The role of rewards has been implicated in the building of self-control[113] and empathy.[114][115][116] Cooperation seems particularly susceptible to rewards.[117][118][119][120] Sharing is another pro-social behavior influenced by reinforcement.[121][122] Reinforcement is particularly effective, at least early in the learning series, if context conditions are similar.[123] Evidence exists to show some generalization.[124] While reinforcement is generally accepted, the role of punishment has been more controversial.

An interesting batch of studies exist in the research on the role of punishment. One study found that donation rates of children could be increased by punishing episodes of failure to donate.[125]

The socialization process continues by teachers and by peers with reinforcement and punishment playing major roles. Peers are more likely to punish cross-gender play and reinforce play specific to gender.[126][127][128] Older studies found that teachers were more likely to reinforce dependent behavior in females.[129] Such patterns have been found to contribute to gender differences at least in the short run.[130]

Behavioral principles have also been researched in emerging peer groups with focus on status.[131] Such research has found that neglected boys are the least interactive and aversive, yet remain relatively unknown in groups. In addition, this research suggests that it takes different social skills to enter groups than to maintain or build status in groups. Other research has found that withdrawn behavior can be decreased with a corresponding increase in social interactions for children.[132]

In short, children have been shown to imitate peers. One study reported on average 13 imitative acts per child and hour.[133] In addition, peers frequently reinforce each other's behavior.[134][135] Among the aspects of social development responsive to peer reinforcement are sex-typed behavior,[136][137] modes of initiating interaction,[138] and aggression.[139] This led to comprehensive behavioral models for moral and social behavior.

Recent efforts by Pelaez-Nogueras & Gewirtz (1995)[140] are of interest in the generation of a comprehensive behavioral development model of moral and social behavior. Their behavior-analytical approach to a comprehensive model highlights how the basic behavioral processes are thought to be involved in the acquisition and maintenance of early moral behavior patterns. Their analysis emphasizes that what has been termed "moral" behavior of an individual is ultimately the result of a history of socio-environmental contingencies affected by the consequences of that individual's behavior. They illustrated how the operant-learning paradigm with its emphasis on action and extrinsic stimuli, can account for much moral behavior as an outcome of conditioning processes. In this analysis, various processes are proposed for pre- and post-language acquisition individuals, taking into account behaviors that are public or private, non-verbal or verbal, and that may denote altruism, empathy, self-sacrifice, sharing, caring, conscience, justice, loyalty, or virtue. In this conceptual work, they noted the distinction between direct contingency-shaped behavior and rule-governed behavior in which moral behavior is seen initially as under the control of nonverbal direct contingencies in pre-linguistic children. Later, with advances in the child's language skills, much of that behavior is seen as coming under the control of verbal explicit rules (including both those that are self-formulated and those provided by others). This behavior analytic approach details the features of the operant-learning paradigm efficiently to explain the very same phenomena in the moral realm; that behavioral, cognitive, and mental theories have targeted at the same time that it attempts to fill in details that cognitive-developmental postulates seem to require. Moreover, this work offered a basic behavior analytic explanation of moral phenomena not previously analyzed. They emphasized behavioral outcomes as well as antecedent and concurrent verbalizations of those behaviors (including verbal reasoning and moral judgment that have been the study matter of cognitive-developmental theories); the model may provide some leads on how to deal with overt actions in the moral realm.

Children with social problems do appear to benefit from behavior therapy and behavior modification based on behavior analytic principles (see Applied Behavior Analysis). For example, modeling has been used to increase participation by shy and withdrawn children.[141] One of the strongest effects seems to be shaping of socially desirable behavior through positive reinforcement.[142]

Anti-social behavior

In the development of anti-social behavior, etiological models for anti-social behavior show considerable correlation with negative reinforcement and response matching (see matching law).[99][143][144] Such models have consistently found a role for escape conditioning through the use of coercive behavior as having a powerful effect on the development and use of future anti-social tactics. From this view, anti-social behavior can be seen as functional for the child in moment to moment interactions. The rate of pro-social tactics used to anti-social tactics used during conflicts is directly proportional to the payoff.[144] This model explains 76% of the variance in child's chosen tactics and over 56% of the variance in the parents' chosen tactics. Finally, the tactic payoff model was replicated and shown to predict arrest rates two years later.[145] (For a complete review see (Synder (2002)).[146] Interventions based on this model are developing as enhancements to the typical behavioral parent training model.[147]

The role of stimulus control has also been extensively explored in the development of anti-social behavior.[148] Using lag sequential analysis, researchers have been able to describe the immediate impact of one person's behavior on another in the family. Such patterns showed that overlearning was so rampant that the behavior was automatic and cognitive awareness was neither necessary nor sufficient to explain the interactions.[149][150]

Recent behavioral focus in the study of anti-social behavior has been a focus on rule-governed behavior. While correspondence for saying and doing has long been an interest for behavior analysts in normal development and typical socialization,[151][152][153] recent conceptualizations have been built around families that actively train children in anti-social rules[154] as well as children who fail to develop rule control.[155]

Developmental depression with origins in childhood

Behavioral theory of depression was outlined by Charles Ferster.[156] A later revision was provided by Peter Lewisohn and Hyman Hops. Hops continued the work on the role of negative reinforcement in maintaining depression with Anthony Biglan.[157][158][159][160] Additional factors such as the role of loss of contingent relations through extinction and punishment were taken from early work of Martin Seligman. The most recent summary and conceptual revisions of the behavioral model was provided by Johnathan Kanter.[161] The standard model is that depression has multiple paths to develop. It can be generated by five basic processes, including: lack or loss of positive reinforcement,[162] direct positive or negative reinforcement for depressive behavior, lack of rule-governed behavior or too much rule-governed behavior, and/or too much environmental punishment. For children, some of these variables could set the pattern for life-long problems. For example, a child whose depressive behavior functions for negative reinforcement by stopping fighting between parents could develop a life-long pattern of depressive behavior in the case of conflicts. Two paths that are particularly important are (1) lack or loss of reinforcement because of missing necessary skills at a developmental cusp point or (2) the failure to develop adequate rule-governed behavior. For the latter, the child could develop a pattern of always choosing the short-term small immediate reward (i.e., escaping studying for a test) at the expense of the long-term larger reward (passing courses in middle school). The treatment approach that emerged from this research is called behavioral activation.

In addition, use of positive reinforcement has been shown to improve symptoms of depression in children.[163] Reinforcement has also been shown to improve the self-concept in children with depression comorbid with learning difficulties.[164] Rawson and Tabb (1993) used reinforcement with 99 students (90 males and 9 females) aged from 8 to 12 with behavior disorders in a residential treatment program and showed significant reduction in depression symptoms compared to the control group.

Cognitive behavior

As children get older, direct control of contingencies is modified by the presence of rule-governed behavior.[165] Rules serve as an establishing operation and set a motivational stage as well as a discrimintative stage for behavior.[20] While the size of the effects on intellectual development are less clear, it appears that stimulation does have a facilitative effect on intellectual ability.[166] However, it is important to be sure not to confuse the enhancing effect with the initial causal effect.[167] Some data exists to show that children with developmental delays take more learning trials to acquire in material.[168]

Learned units and developmental retardation

Behavior analysts have spent considerable time measuring learning in the classroom and at home. During the course of this work, they have often presented evidence of the role of lack of stimulation in the development of mild and moderate mental retardardation.[169] Recent work has been on a model of "developmental retardation".[170] Often research in this area looks at cumulative environmental effects and how they create developmental delays. The opportunity to respond is defined as an instructional antecedent and its success in getting the appropriate response, sometimes fluency is used to measure this.[171] The learned unit is defined as the opportunity to respond plus reinforcement.[172]

In one study using this model, students' time of instruction was compared in affluent schools to poorer schools. Actual amount of instruction received revealed that poorer schools lost on average about 15 minutes per day in instruction due to issues of classroom management and behavior management issues. This compiled to two years worth of lost instructional time by grade 10.[173] The goal of such behavior analytic research is to provide methods for reducing the overall number of children who fall into the retardation range of development by behavioral engineering.[174]

Probably the most extensive study to date has been the work of Hart and Risely (1995, 1999).[175][176] These authors contrasted the rates of parent communication with children at the age of 2–4 years and correlated it with IQ scores for children at age 9. The research showed that the more parents spoke to children, the higher the IQ was, even after controlling for race, class, and socio-economic status. The authors reached the conclusion that to change IQ scores significantly, an interventionist would need to work with children at risk for close to 40 hours a week. As pointed out in the Bell Curve, no program to date has been effective in the long-term change of IQ scores and producing significant corresponding changes in social class.

Class formation

The formation of class-like behavior has been of considerable interest to behavior analysts studying development. Extensive research has been done in this area.[177] From this research, behavior analysts have offered multiple paths to the development and formation of class-like behavior. These paths include primary stimulus generalization,[178][179] an analysis of abstraction,[74][180][181][182][183][184] relational frame theory,[185][186][187][188] stimulus class analysis (sometimes referred to as recombinative generalization),[189][190] stimulus equivalence,[191] and response class analysis.[192][193][194][195][196][197] Of particular interest is the analysis of the response class. Multiple processes for class-like formation provide behavior analysts with relatively pragmatic explanations for common issues of novelity and generalization.

Responses organize in a form assembled by the particular form need to fit the environmental challenge at hand. Thus, the forms of the responses organize by responses functional consequences. Such large response classes can merge as in the case of contingency adduction.[198] Much more research needs to be done on the issue of contingency adduction, especially with a focus on how large classes of concepts shift. For example, as Piaget pointed out have a tendency at the pre-operational stage to have limits to their ability to conserver (Piaget & Szeminska, 1952). While training children to develop conservation skills has been generally successful,[199][200] it is by no means easy.[201] Behavior analysts argue that this is largely due to the number of tool skills that need to be developed and integrated. Adduction offers a process by which such skills can be synthesized and hence warrants further attention, particularly by early interventionists. Even with this said, children who learn to conserve early do not appear to have any other life benefit from the learning process.[201] This brings up questions of the relevance of Piaget's model to development.

Autism

Ferster (1961) was the first to posit a behavior analytic theory for autism.[202] Ferster's model saw autism as a by-product of social interactions between parent and child. Ferster presented an analysis of how a variety of contingencies of reinforcement between parent and child during the early years might establish and strengthen a repertoire of behaviors typically seen in children diagnosed with autism. A similar model was proposed by Drash and Tutor (1993). They developed the contingency-shaped or behavioral incompatibility theory of autism.[203] They identify at least six reinforcement paradigms that may contribute to significant deficiency in verbal behavior that they identified and analyzed in their research with children diagnosed as autistic. They held that each of these paradigms may concurrently create a repertoire of avoidance responses that could contribute to the establishment of a repertoire of behavior that would be incompatible with the acquisition of age-appropriate verbal behavior.

More recent models attribute autism to neurological and sensory models that play out overtime to produce the autistic repertoire. Lovaas and Smith (1989) proposed that children with autism have a mismatch between their nervous systems and the environment.[204] Bijou and Ghezzi (1999) proposed a behavioral interference theory.[205] However, some recent evidence for the environmental mismatch model was recently reviewed as well as the inference model.[206] From this article, it appears that some support exists to suggest that the development of ausitic behaviors are due to escape and avoidance of certain types of sensory stimuli. What seems to be the common feature of the behavioral models for autism, is the stunning lack of research conducted on them. At this point, they remain mostly speculation. For intervention see Natural language procedures.

Role in education

One of the biggest impacts that behavior analysis of child development has had is on the field of education. In 1968, Siegfried Englemann used operant conditioning techniques, a task analysis of curriculum, and combined them with rule learning to produce the Direct Instruction curriculum (see DISTAR).[207][208] In addition, Fred S. Keller used similar techniques to develop programmed instruction. Skinner developed a programmed instruction curriculum for teaching hand writing. One of Skinner's students, Ogden Lindsley, developed a standardized semilogrithmic chart, the "Standard Behavior Chart" now "Standard Celeration Chart" for recording frequencies of behavior, and to allow direct visual comparisons of such frequencies and changes in those frequencies, termed "celeration". Use of this charting tool for analysis of instructional effect or other environmental variable by direct measurement of learner performance has become known as precision teaching.[209]

Behavior analysts with a behavioral development focus form the basis of a movement that has come to be termed positive behavior support (PBS). PBS has been focused on building safe schools.[210]

In education, there are many different kinds of learning that are required for later interaction in the world. Such aspects of learning include social and language.[211] These different areas of development are crucial for a growing child. And as technology continues to increase, its power has been spread to all areas. Technology can be used for good but too much of a good thing can have negative effects on a child or person. According to the NWREL (Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory), too much technology will hinder a child's social interactions with others. There is always a fear that later in life, this early computer interaction will become an addiction and lead to anti-social behavior.[212] Not only is education and technology a big factor in child development, language always plays a big role. Language development doesn't seem to have the same need for technology as social development does but studies show that some technology helps motor skills develop more efficiently. It is said that by the age of 18 months, a child will start to learn and know about 5–20 different words.[213] It is then understood that once the child knows these words, they go explore in the world and get a better understanding of this world.

Critiques of behavioral approach and new developments

Some have questioned if a behavioral approach to development is enough or if more traditional developmental variables play a causal role,[214] particularly in areas of attachment.[215] While some questions remain, it is clear that, in general, response-contingent learning opportunities produce strong emotional benefits and enhance emotional development.[37]

Behavior analytic theories have been criticized for focusing on explaining the acquisition of relatively simple behavior (the behavior of nonhuman species, of infants, and of individuals who are intellectually disabled or autistic) rather than complex behavior (see Commons & Miller).[216] Michael Commons continued behavior analysis's rejecting of mentalism and substituted a task analysis of the particular skills to be learned. This approach shows that more complex behaviors combine and sequence less complex behaviors. This fact of hierarchical organization may be used to define the nature of stage and stage transition. In his new model, he has created a behavior analytic model of more complex behavior in line with more contemporary quantitative behavior analytic models. He calls this the Model of Hierarchical Complexity. Commons[217] constructed the Model of Hierarchical Complexity of tasks and their corresponding stages of performance using basically just three main axioms (see Model of Hierarchical Complexity).[218]

In the study of development, recent work has been generated around combining behavior analytic views with dynamical systems theory.[219] The added benefit of this approach is that it shows how small patterns of changes in behavior in terms of principles and mechanisms over time can produce substantial changes in development.[220]

Current research in behavior analysis attempts to extend the patterns learned in childhood and to determine their impact on adult development.

Case studies

Following the fall of the Soviet-backed government in Romania in 1989, international adoption became a legal practice again. In 1991, a study was started that followed the development of orphans from the Romania orphanage to their new homes four years later. In total, seventy Canadian children were divided into three different groups. These groups related the orphanage against a normal childhood upbringing. The researchers interviewed the subjects and paired each of them with a similar subject in an opposing group, matching exact age and gender.

There were twenty-four Romanian orphans that were followed after adoption. These children stayed in the orphanage for at least eight months of the first year of their life. Also children in this group were monitored to see if they were favored by the workers at the orphanage, to see if they received special care or attention. The twenty-four Canadian-born children were set up as a control group. These children were born in traditional nuclear families. These were not Romanian children; the only thing they had in common with their counterpart was exact age and gender. The third group was a smaller variable group where the researchers looked at eleven children that had been adopted from the orphanage less than four months from birth. These children were picked to determine if the amount of time in the orphanage had any effect on development at all.

When the children were on average, two researchers would interview the parents and the child separately. The parents were interviewed to determine the type of environment in which the child had lived. The child was given a Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scale IQ test. The preconception was that the Romanian group would score lower than both the Canadian group and the early adopted. The results show that the Romanian children have what is considered healthy brain activity, but show a deficiency in higher power motor skills and cognitive processes. This supports the researchers' claims that early childhood institutionalization directly affects the cognitive development of a child.

The early adoption group proved little results against either group. All eleven children in the group scored in between the Romanian and the Canadian groups in the IQ tests, yet there were not enough subjects in the group to give it credibility. But, one can take from this data that adoption before four months does increase the child's chances of cognitive growth.[221]

Professional organizations

The Association for Behavior Analysis International has a special interest group for the behavior analysis of child development.

Doctoral level behavior analysts who are psychologists belong to American Psychological Association's division 25: Behavior analysis.

The World Association for Behavior Analysis has a certification in behavior therapy. The exam draws questions on behavioral theories of child development as well as behavioral theories of child psychopathology.[222]

See also

Journal

References

  1. ^ Watson, J.B. (1926). What the nursery has to say about instincts. In C. Murchison (Eds.) Psychologies of 1925. Worchester, MA: Clark University Press.
  2. ^ White, S.H. (1968). "The learning maturation controversy: Hall to Hull". Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 14: 187–196. 
  3. ^ Skinner, B.F. (1974). About Behaviorism. Knopf
  4. ^ Skinner, B.F. (1953) Science and Human Behavior. New York: The Free Press
  5. ^ Bijou, S.W. (1955). "A systematic approach to an experimental analysis of young children". Child Development 26 (3): 161–168. PMID 13261293. 
  6. ^ Bijou, S.W. (1957). "Patterns of reinforcement and resistance to extinction in young children". Child Development 28 (1): 47–54. PMID 13404656. 
  7. ^ Bijou, S.W. (1958). "Operant extinction after fixed-interval schedules with young children". Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 1 (1): 25–29. doi:10.1901/jeab.1958.1-25. PMC 1403884. PMID 16811199. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1403884. 
  8. ^ Baer, D.M. (1993). "A brief, selective history of the Department of Human Development and Family Life at the University of Kansas: The early years". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 26 (4): 569–572. doi:10.1901/jaba.1993.26-569. PMC 1297894. PMID 16795815. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1297894. 
  9. ^ Bijou, S.W.; Baer, D.M. (1961). Child Development: Vol. 1: a Systematic and Empirical Theory. Prentice-Hall. ISBN 0131303775. 
  10. ^ Rosales-Ruiz, J.; Baer, D.M. (1997). "Behavioral cusps". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 30: 533–544. http://seab.envmed.rochester.edu/jaba/articles/1997/jaba-30-03-0533.pdf. 
  11. ^ Bosch, S.; Hixson, M.D. (2004). "The Final Piece to a Complete Science of Behavior: Behavior Development and Behavioral Cusps". The Behavior Analyst Today 5 (3): 244–253. 
  12. ^ Commons, M.L.; Richards, F.A. (1995). "Behavior analytic approach to dialectics of stage performance and stage change". Behavioral Development 5 (2): 7–9. 
  13. ^ Baer, D.M. (1982). "Behavior analysis and developmental psychology: Discussant comments". Human Development 25: 357–361. 
  14. ^ Gerwitz, J.L.; Pelaez-Nogueras, M. (1992). "B.F. Skinner's legacy to infant behavioral development". American Psychologist 47 (11): 1411–1422. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.47.11.1411. PMID 1482005. 
  15. ^ Reese, H.W. (1980). "A learning theory critique of the operant approach to life span development". Human Development 23 (6): 368–376. PMID 7419223. 
  16. ^ Reese (1986)
  17. ^ Morris, E.K. (1988). "Contextualism: The worldview of behavior analysis". Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 46 (3): 289–323. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(88)90063-X. 
  18. ^ Schlinger, H.D. (2004). "The almost blank slate: Making a case for human nurture". Skeptic 11: 34–43. 
  19. ^ Baer, D.M. (1973). The control of developmental process: Why wait? In J.R. Nesselrode & H.W. Reese (Eds.) Life Span Developmental Psychology: Methodological Issues. Oxford, England: Academic Press
  20. ^ a b c Schlinger, H.D., Jr. (1995). A Behavior Analytic View of Child Development. NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers
  21. ^ Catania, A.C. (1998). Learning (fourth edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
  22. ^ Morris, E.K.; Hursch, D.E. (1982). "Behavior analysis and developmental psychology: Metatheoretical considerations". Human Development 25: 344–349. 
  23. ^ Reese, H.W. (2005). "A Conceptual Analysis of Selectionism: Parts I and II.". Behavioral Development Bulletin 1 (1): 8–16. 
  24. ^ Vyse, S. (2004). "Stability over time: Is behavior analysis a trait psychology?". The Behavior Analyst 27 (1): 43–54. 
  25. ^ Pelaez (1998). "Behavior analysis of development: History, theory, and research". Mexican Journal of Behavior Analysis 24: 85–95. 
  26. ^ Behavioral Development Bulletin, 13 (1)
  27. ^ Bijou, S.W. & Baer, D.M. (1960). The laboratory-experimental study of child behavior. In P.H. Mussen (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in child development. (pp. 140–197). New York: Wiley.
  28. ^ Gewirtz, J.L. (1969). Mechanisms of social learning: Some roles of stimulation and behavior in early human development. In D.A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research. (pp. 57–212). Chicago: Rand McNally
  29. ^ Goetz, E.M.; Baer, D. (1973). "Social control of form diversity and the emergence of new forms in children's blockbuilding". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 6: 123–128. 
  30. ^ Baer, D.M. (1977). "Reviewer's comments: Just because it is reliable doesn't mean you can use it.". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 10 (1): 117–119. doi:10.1901/jaba.1977.10-117. PMC 1311157. PMID 16795539. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1311157. 
  31. ^ Snyder, J.J.; Patterson, G.R. (1986). "The effects of consequences on patterns of social interaction: A quasi-experimental approach to reinforcement in the natural environment". Child Development 57 (5): 1257–1268. doi:10.2307/1130448. JSTOR 1130448. PMID 3769609. 
  32. ^ a b Cavell, T.A. & Strand, P.S. (2002). Parent-Based interventions for aggressive, antisocial children: Adapting to a bilateral lens. In L. Kuczynski (Ed.) Handbook of dynamics in parent-child relations. (pp. 395–419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  33. ^ a b Gewirtz, J.L. & Peláez-Nogueras, M. (1991). The attachment metaphor and the conditioning of infant separation protests. In J.L. Gewirtz & W.M. Kurtines (Eds.), Intersections with attachment. (pp. 123–144). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
  34. ^ Patterson, G.R. (2002). The early development of coercive family processes. In J.B. Reid, G.R. Patterson & J. Snyder, J.J. (Eds.). Antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: A Developmental analysis and model for intervention. APA Press
  35. ^ Watson, J.S. (1979). Perception of contingency as a determinant of social responsiveness. In E.B. Thoman (Ed.), Origins of the infant's social responsiveness. In E.B. Thoman (Ed.) Origins of the infant's social responsiveness. (pp. 33–64). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
  36. ^ Gewirtz, J.L. & Boyd, E.F. (1977). Experiments on mother-infant interaction underlying mutual attachment acquisition: The infant conditions the mother. In T. Alloway, P. Plinger & L. Krames (Eds.). Attachment behavior. (pp. 109–143). New York: Plenum Press
  37. ^ a b Dunst, C.J.; Raab, M.; Trivette, C.M.; Parkey, C.; Gatens, M.; Wilson, L.L. French; Hamby, D.W. (2007). "Child and Adult Social-Emotional Benefits of Response-Contingent Child Learning Opportunities". JEIBI 4 (2): 379–391. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ805542&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ805542. 
  38. ^ Gewirtz, J.L. (1961). A learning analysis of the effects of normal stimulation, privation, and deprivation on the acquisition of social motivation and attachment. In B.M. Foss (Ed.), Determinants of infant behaviour. (pp. 213–229). New York: Wiley.
  39. ^ Gewirtz, J. & Pelaez-Nogueras, M. (2000). Infant emotions under the positive-reinforcer control of caregiver attention and touch. In J.C. Leslie & D. Blackman (Eds.), Issues in Experimental and Applied Analysis of Human Behavior. (pp. 271–291). Reno, NV: Context Press
  40. ^ Kassow, D.Z.; Dunst, C.J. (2004). "Relationship between parental contingent-responsiveness and attachment outcomes". Bridges 2 (4): 1–17. http://www.researchtopractice.info/bridges/bridges_vol2_no4.pdf. 
  41. ^ Herrnstein, R.J. (1961). "Relative and absolute strength of responses as a function of frequency or reinforcement". Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior 4 (3): 267–272. doi:10.1901/jeab.1961.4-267. 
  42. ^ Patterson, G.R. (1984). Microsocial processes: A view from the boundary. In J. Masters (Ed.), Boundary areas in social and developmental psychology. (pp. 43–66). New York: Academic Press.
  43. ^ Wahler, R.G.; Herring, M.; Edwards, M. (2001). "Coregulation of balance between children's prosocial approaches and acts of compliance: A pathway to mother–child cooperation?". Journal of Clinical Child Psychology 30 (4): 473–478. doi:10.1207/S15374424JCCP3004_04. PMID 11708235. 
  44. ^ Wahler, R.G.; Bellamy, A. (1997). "Generating reciprocity with conduct problem children and their mothers: The effectiveness of compliance teaching and responsive parenting". Journal of Social and Personal Relationships (Special issue: Reciprocity and Bidirectionality) 14 (4): 549–564. 
  45. ^ Wahler, R.G.; Smith, G.G. (1999). "Effective parenting as the integration of lessons and dialogue". Journal of Child and Family Studies 8 (2): 135–149. doi:10.1023/A:1022031716547. 
  46. ^ Dunst, C.J.; Kassow, D.Z. (2004). "Characteristics of interventions promoting parental sensitivity to child behavior". Bridges 2: 1–17. 
  47. ^ Dunst, C.J.; Kassow, D.Z. (2008). "Caregiver Sensitivity, Contingent Social Responsiveness, and Secure Infant Attachment". Journal of Early and Intensive Behavioral Intervention 5 (1): 40–56. 
  48. ^ Cairns, R.B. (1979). The analysis of social interaction: Methods, issues, and illustrations. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
  49. ^ Quay, H.C. (1987). Patterns of delinquent behavior. In H.C. Quay (Ed.). Handbook of Juvenile Delinquency. (pp. 118–138). New York: Wiley
  50. ^ Commons, M.L. (1991). A comparison and synthesis of Kohlberg's cognitive developmental theories and Gerwitz's learning-developmental attachment theories. In J.L. Gewirtz & W.M. Kurtines (Eds.) Intersections with attachment. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
  51. ^ Commons, M.L.; Miller, P.M. (2007). "How Early Negative Caregiving: Experiences Relate to Stage of Attachment". Behavioral Development Bulletin 13: 14–17. 
  52. ^ Savelsbergh, G.J.P. (2005). "Discovery Of Motor Development: A Tribute To Esther Thelen". The Behavior Analyst Today 6 (4): 243–249. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  53. ^ Thelen, E.; Fisher, D.M. (1982). "Newborn stepping: An explanation for a 'disappearing reflex'". Developmental Psychology 18 (5): 760–775. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.18.5.760. 
  54. ^ Dennis, W. (1960). "Causes of retardation among institutional children: Iran". Journal of Genetic Psychology 96: 47–59. PMID 13815945. 
  55. ^ Dennis, W.; Najarian, P. (1957). "Infant development under environmental handicap". Psychological Monograph 71 (7): 1–13. 
  56. ^ Sayegh, Y.; Dennis, W. (1965). "The effects of supplementary experience upon behavioral development of infants in institutions". Child Development 36 (1): 81–90. doi:10.2307/1126782. JSTOR 1126782. PMID 14296799. 
  57. ^ Masiello, T.; Tucker (2006). "Influences of treadmill training on the motor development of infants with and without disabilities". Bridges 4 (5): 1–17. http://www.researchtopractice.info/bridges/bridges_vol4_no5.pdf. 
  58. ^ Cautilli, J.D.; Dziewolska, H. (2005). "A Brief Report: Can Contingent Imitation Reinforce Truck Lifting In A Three-Month-Old Infant?". The Behavior Analyst Today 6 (4): 229–234. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  59. ^ Dziewolska, H.; Cautilli, J.D. (2006). "The Effects of a Motor Training Package on Minimally Assisted Standing Behavior in a Three-Month-Old Infant". The Behavior Analyst Today 7 (1): 111–124. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  60. ^ Cautilli, J.D.; Dziewolska, H. (2006). "Brief Report: The Use of Opportunity to Respond and Practice to increase efficiency of the stepping reflex in a five-month-old infant". Behavior Analyst Today 7 (4): 538–547. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  61. ^ Ince, L.; Brucker, B. & Alba A. (1977): Behavioral techniques applied to the care of patients with spinal cord injuries. In J. Kamiya, T.X. Barber, N.E. Miller, D. Shapiro & J. Stoyva (Eds.) Biofeedback and Self-control. Chicago, IL: Alpine, 515–523.
  62. ^ Brucker B. (1983): Spinal cord injuries. In Burish and Bradley (Ed.) Coping with Chronic Disease: Research and Applications. New York: Academic Press, 285–311.
  63. ^ Brucker B. (1984): Biofeedback in rehabilitation. In Golden (Ed.) Current Topics in Rehabilitation Psychology. San Diego, California: Grune and Stratton, 173–199
  64. ^ Brucker, B.; & Ince, L. (1979): Biofeedback as an experimental treatment for postural hypotension in a patient with a spinal cord lesion. In J. Stoyva, J. Kamiya, T.X. Barber, N.E. Miller & D. Shapiro (Eds.). Biofeedback and Self Control. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine, 557–561.
  65. ^ Brucker, B. (1980): Biofeedback and rehabilitation. In L.P. Ince (Ed.) Behavioral Psychology in Rehabilitation Medicine: Clinical Applications. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 188–217.
  66. ^ Miller, N. & Brucker, B. (1981): A learned visceral response apparently independent of skeletal ones in patients paralyzed by spinal lesions. In D. Shapiro, J. Stoyva, J. Kamiya, T.X. Barber, N.E. Miller & G.E. Schwartz (Eds.). Biofeedback and behavioral medicine. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine, 355–372
  67. ^ Brucker, B.S.; Bulaeva, N.V. (1996). "Biofeedback effect on electromyography responses in patients with spinal cord injury". Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 77 (2): 133–137. doi:10.1016/S0003-9993(96)90157-4. PMID 8607736. 
  68. ^ Watson, J.B. (1924). Talking and thinking. In J.B Watson's Behaviorism. Norton, New York.
  69. ^ Kantor, J.R. (1929). "Can psychology contribute to the study of linguistics?". The Monist 38: 630–648. 
  70. ^ Weiss, A.P. (1929). The language responses. In A.P. Weiss's (Ed.) A theoretical basis of human behavior. Adams, Columbus, Oh
  71. ^ Esper, E.A. (1925). A technique for the experimental investigation of associative inference in artificial linguistic systems. Language Monographs No. 1
  72. ^ Mineo, D.A.; Goldstein, H. (1990). "Generalized learning of receptive and expressive action–object responses by language delayed preschoolers". Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 55 (4): 665–678. PMID 2232747. 
  73. ^ Wetherby, B. (1978). Miniature language and the functional analysis of verbal behavior. In R. Schiefelbusch (Ed.), Bases of language intervention. (pp. 397–448). Baltimore: University Park Press.
  74. ^ a b c Skinner, B.F. (1957). Verbal Behavior. New York: Appleton
  75. ^ Riegler, H.C. & Baer, D.M. (1989). A developmental analysis of rule-following. In H.W. Reese (Ed.) Advances in child development and behavior. (Vol. 21). San Diego: Academic Press.
  76. ^ Skinner, B.F. (1957), page 4
  77. ^ Chomsky, N.; Skinner, B.F. (1959). "Review of Skinner's Verbal Behavior". Language 35 (1): 26–58. doi:10.2307/411334. JSTOR 411334. 
  78. ^ Richelle, M. (1976). "Formal and functional analysis of verbal behavior: Notes on the debate between Chomsky and Skinner". Behaviorism 4: 209–211. 
  79. ^ MacCorquodale, K. (1970). "On Chomsky's review of Skinner's Verbal Behavior". Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 13 (1): 83–99. doi:10.1901/jeab.1970.13-83. 
  80. ^ Andresen, J.T. (1990). "Skinner and Chomsky thirty years later: Or return of the repressed". Historiographica Linguistica 17 (1): 145–166. doi:10.1075/hl.17.1-2.12and. 
  81. ^ Palmer, D.C.; Donahoe, J.W. (1992). "Essentialism and selectionism in cognitive science and behavior analysis". American Psychologist 47 (11): 1344–1358. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.47.11.1344. PMID 1482002. 
  82. ^ Skinner, B.F. (1981). "Selection by consequence". Science 213 (4507): 501–504. doi:10.1126/science.7244649. PMID 7244649. 
  83. ^ Moerk, E. (1996). "Input and learning processes in first language acquisition". Advances in Child Development and Behavior 26: 181–229. doi:10.1016/S0065-2407(08)60509-1. 
  84. ^ Moerk, E.L. (1986). Environmental factors in early language acquisition. In G.J. Whitehurst (Ed.), Annals of child development. (Vol. 3). Greenwich, CT: JAI press.
  85. ^ Moerk, E.L. (1989). "The LAD was a lady and the tasks were ill defined". Developmental Review 9 (1): 21–57. doi:10.1016/0273-2297(89)90022-1. 
  86. ^ Whitehurst, G.J.; Vasta, R. (1975). "Is language learned through imitation?". Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 4 (1): 37–59. doi:10.1007/BF01066989. 
  87. ^ Whitehurst, G.J.; Novak, G. (1973). "Modeling, imitation, and the acquisition of sentence phrases". Journal of the Experimental Child Psychology 16 (2): 332–345. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(73)90171-9. 
  88. ^ Moerk, E.L. (1977). "Processes and roducts of imitation: Additional evidence that imitation is progressive". Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 6: 187–202. 
  89. ^ Moerk, E.L. (1990). "Three term contingency patterns in mother child verbal interactions during first-language acquisition". Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 54 (3): 293–305. doi:10.1901/jeab.1990.54-293. PMC 1322999. PMID 16812626. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1322999. 
  90. ^ Whitehurst, G.J.; Valdez-Mechaca, M.C. (1988). "What is the role of reinforcement in language acquisition?". Child Development 59 (2): 430–440. doi:10.2307/1130322. JSTOR 1130322. PMID 3359863. 
  91. ^ Moerk, E.L. (1983). "A behavior analysis of controversial topics in first language acquisition: Reinforcement, corrections, modeling, input frequencies, and the three term contingency pattern". Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 12 (2): 129–155. doi:10.1007/BF01067408. 
  92. ^ Moerk, E.L. (1994). "Corrections in first language acquisition: Theorectial controversies and factual evidence". International Journal of Psycholinguistics 10: 33–58. 
  93. ^ Greer, R.D.; Keohane, D. (2006). "The Evolution of Verbal Behavior in Children". Slp- Aba 1 (2): 111–140. 
  94. ^ Reese, H.W. (2004). "Private Speech and Other Forms of Self-Communication". The Behavior Analyst Today 5 (2): 182–189. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  95. ^ Skinner (1957). Verbal Behavior. Croft
  96. ^ Ross, D.E.; Nuzzolo, R.; Stolfi, L.; Natarelli, S. (2006). "Effects of Speaker Immersion on the Spontaneous Speaker Behavior of Preschool Children with Communication Delays". JEIBI 3 (1): 135–145. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  97. ^ Greer, R.D.; Ross, D.E. (2004). "Verbal behavior analysis: A program of research in the induction and expansion of complex verbal behavior". Journal of Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention 1 (2): 141–165. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  98. ^ a b Chu, H.C. (1998). A comparison of verbal-behavior and social-skills approaches for development of social interaction skills and concurrent reduction of aberrant behaviors of children with developmental disabilities in the context of matching theory. (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, 1998). Abstract from: UMI Proquest Digital Dissertations [on-line]. Dissertations Abstracts Item: AAT 9838900.
  99. ^ a b Patterson, G.R. (2002). "Etiology and Treatment of Child and Adolescent Antisocial Behavior". The Behavior Analyst Today 3 (2): 133–145. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  100. ^ Cautilli, J.; Tillman, T.C. (2004). "Evidence Based Practice in the Home and School to Help Educate the Socially Maladjusted Child". JEIBI 1 (1): 28–35. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  101. ^ Bevill-Davis, A.; Clees, T.J.; Gast, D.L. (2004). "Correspondence Training: A Review of the Literature". JEIBI 1 (1): 14–28. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  102. ^ Greer, R.D. & Speckman, J.M. (in press). The Integration of Speaker and Listener Responses: A Theory of the Development of Verbal Behavior. The Psychological Record.
  103. ^ Kohlenberg, R. & Tsai, M. (1991). Functional analytic psychotherapy: Building intense and curative relationships. Plenum Press
  104. ^ Nelson-Gray, R.O.; Mitchell, J.T.; Kimbrel, N.A.; Hurst, R.M. (2007). "The Development and Maintenance of Personality Disorders: A Behavioral Perspective". The Behavior Analyst Today 8 (4): 443–445. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  105. ^ Eisenberg, N.; Wolchik, S.A.; Goldberg, L.; Engel, I. (1992). "Parental values, reinforcement, and young children's prosocial behavior: a longitudinal study". J Genet Psychol 153 (1): 19–36. PMID 1645156. 
  106. ^ Snyder, J.J.; Patterson, G.R. (1995). "Individual differences in social aggression: a test of a reinforcement model of socialization in the natural environment". Behav Ther 26 (2): 371–91. doi:10.1016/S0005-7894(05)80111-X. 
  107. ^ Patterson, G.R. (2002). "Etiology and treatment of child and adolescent antisocial behavior" (PDF). Behav Analyst Today 3 (2): 133–45. http://behavior-analyst-today.com/VOL-3/BAT-3-2.pdf. 
  108. ^ Midlarsky, E.; Bryan, J.H.; Brickman, P. (1973). "Aversive approval: Interactive effects of modeling and reinforcement on altruistic behavior". Child Development 44 (2): 321–328. doi:10.2307/1128054. JSTOR 1128054. PMID 4705559. 
  109. ^ Harris, M.B. (1970). "Reciprocity and generosity: Some determinants of sharing in children". Child Development 41 (2): 313–328. doi:10.2307/1127034. JSTOR 1127034. 
  110. ^ Elliot, R.; Vasta, R. (1970). "Effects associated with vicarious reinforcement, symbolization, age, and generalization". Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 10 (1): 8–15. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(70)90038-X. 
  111. ^ Bryan, J.H.; Walbek, N.H. (1970). "Impact of words and deeds concerning altruism upon children". Child Development 41 (3): 747–759. doi:10.2307/1127221. JSTOR 1127221. 
  112. ^ Bryan, J.H.; Walbek, N. (1970). "Preaching and practicing generosity: Children's action and reaction". Child Development 41 (2): 329–353. doi:10.2307/1127035. JSTOR 1127035. 
  113. ^ Barry, L.M.; Haraway, D.L. (2005). "Self-Management and ADHD: A Literature Review". The Behavior Analyst Today 6 (1): 48–64. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  114. ^ Maccoby, E.M. (1968). The development of moral values and behavior in childhood. In J.A. Clausen's (Ed). Socialization and Society. Little Brown Books: Boston
  115. ^ Aronfreed, J. (1968). Conduct and conscience: The socializing of internalized control of overt behavior. New York: Academic Press
  116. ^ Aronfreed, J. (1970). The socialization of altruistic and sympathetic behavior: Some theoretical and experimental analysis. In J. Macauley & L. Berkowitz (Eds.) Altruism and helping behavior. New York: Academic Press.
  117. ^ Azrin, N.; Lindsley, O. (1956). "The reinforcement of cooperation between children". Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 2: 100–102. 
  118. ^ Mithaug, E.D.; Burgess, R.L. (1968). "The effects of different reinforcement contingencies in the development of social cooperation". Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 6 (3): 402–426. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(68)90122-7. PMID 5687123. 
  119. ^ Vogler, R.E.; Masters, W.M.; Merrill, G.S. (1970). "Shaping cooperative behavior in young children". Journal of Psychology 74 (2): 181–186. doi:10.1080/00223980.1970.9923728. 
  120. ^ Vogler, R.E.; Masters, W.M.; Merrill, G.S. (1971). "Extinction of cooperative behavior as a function of acquisition by shaping or instruction". Journal of Genetic Psychology 119: 233–240. 
  121. ^ Doland, D.J.; Adelberg, K. (1967). "The learning of sharing behavior". Child Development 38 (3): 695–700. doi:10.2307/1127247. JSTOR 1127247. PMID 6049633. 
  122. ^ Gelfand, D.M.; Hartmann, D.P.; Cromer, C.C.; Smith, C.L.; Page, B.C. (1975). "The effects of instructional prompts and praise on children's donation rates". Child Development 46: 980–983. 
  123. ^ Fisher, W.F. (1963). "Sharing in preschool as a function of the amount and type of reinforcement". Genetic Psychology Monograph 68: 215–245. 
  124. ^ Altman, K. (1971). "Effects of cooperative response acquisition on social behavior during free play". Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 12 (3): 387–395. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(71)90033-6. 
  125. ^ Hartmann, D.P.; Gelfand, D.M.; Smith, C.L.; Paul, S.C.; Cromer, C.C.; Page, B.C.; Lebenta, D.V. (1976). "Factors affecting the acquisition and elimination of children's donating behavior". Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 21 (2): 328–338. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(76)90046-1. 
  126. ^ Fagot, Beverly I.; Patterson, Gerald R. (1969). "An in vivo analysis of reinforcing contingencies for sex-role behaviors in the preschool child.". Developmental Psychology 1 (5): 563. doi:10.1037/h0027965. 
  127. ^ Lamb, M.E.; Roopnarine, J.L. (1979). "Peer influences on sex role development in preschoolers". Child Development 50 (4): 1219–1222. doi:10.2307/1129353. JSTOR 1129353. 
  128. ^ Lamb, M.E.; Easterbrooks, M.A.; Holden, G. (1980). "Reinforcement and punishment among preschoolers: Characteristics and Corrales". Child Development 51 (4): 1230–1236. doi:10.2307/1129565. JSTOR 1129565. 
  129. ^ Serbin, L.O'Leary; Kent, R.; Tonick, I.; Tonick, I.J. (1973). "A comparison of teacher responses to pre-academic and problem behavior of boys and girls". Child Development 44 (4): 796–804. doi:10.2307/1127726. JSTOR 1127726. PMID 4751301. 
  130. ^ Serbin, L.; Connors, J.; Citron, C. (1978). "Environmental control of independent and dependent behaviors in preschool boys and girls: A model for early independence training". Sex Roles 4 (6): 867–875. doi:10.1007/BF00287706. 
  131. ^ Coie, J.D.; Kupersmidt, J.B. (1983). "A Behavioral Analysis of Emerging Social Status in Boys' Groups.". Child Development 54 (6): 1400–1416. doi:10.2307/1129803. JSTOR 1129803. 
  132. ^ Allen, K.E.; Hart, B.; Buell, J.S.; Harris, F.R.; Wolf, M.M. (1964). "Effects of Social Reinforcement on Isolate Behavior of a Nursery School Child". Child Development 35 (2): 511–518. 
  133. ^ Abramovitch, R.; Grusec, J.E. (1978). "Peer imitation in a natural setting". Child Development 49 (1): 60–65. doi:10.2307/1128593. JSTOR 1128593. 
  134. ^ Charlesworth, R.; Hartup, W.W. (1967). "Positive social reinforcement in the nursery school per group". Child Development 38 (4): 993–1002. doi:10.2307/1127097. JSTOR 1127097. PMID 5583075. 
  135. ^ Furman, W.; Masters, J.C. (1980). "Affective consequences of social reinforcement, punishment, and neutral behavior". Developmental Psychology 16 (2): 100–104. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.16.2.100. 
  136. ^ Lamb, M.E.; Easterbrooks, M.A.; Holden, G.W. (1980). "Reinforcement and punishment among preschoolers: Characteristics, effects, and correlates". Child Development 51 (4): 1230–1236. doi:10.2307/1129565. JSTOR 1129565. 
  137. ^ Lamb, M.E.; Roopnarine, J.L. (1979). "Peer influences on sex-role development in preschoolers". Child Development 50 (4): 1219–1222. doi:10.2307/1129353. JSTOR 1129353. 
  138. ^ Leiter, M.P. (1977). "A study of reciprocity in preschool play groups". Child Development 48 (4): 1288–1295. doi:10.2307/1128486. JSTOR 1128486. 
  139. ^ Patterson, G.R.; Littman, R.A. & Bricker, W. (1967). Assertive behavior in children: A step toward a theory of aggression. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 32, (5, Serial No. 113).
  140. ^ Pelaez-Nogueras, M. & Gewirtz, J.L. (1995). The learning of moral behavior: A behavior-analytic approach. In W.M. Kurtines & J.L. Gewirtz (Eds.), Moral behavior: An introduction. (pp. 173–199). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  141. ^ Jakibuchuk, Z.; Smeriglio, V.L. (1976). "The influence of symbolic modeling on the social behavior of preschool children with low levels of social responsiveness". Child Development 47 (3): 838–841. doi:10.2307/1128203. JSTOR 1128203. 
  142. ^ O'Connor, R.D. (1972). "Relative efficacy of modeling, shaping, and the combined procedure for the modification of social withdrawal". Journal of Abnormal Psychology 79 (3): 327–334. doi:10.1037/h0033226. PMID 5033375. 
  143. ^ Snyder, J.; Stoolmiller, M.; Patterson, G.R.; Schrepferman, L.; Oeser, J.; Johnson, K.; Soetaert, D. (2003). "The Application of Response Allocation Matching to Understanding Risk Mechanisms in Development: The Case of Young Children's Deviant Talk and Play, and Risk for Early-Onset Antisocial Behavior". The Behavior Analyst Today 4 (4): 435–453. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  144. ^ a b Snyder, J.; Patterson, G.R. (1995). "Individual differences in social aggression: A test of a reinforcement model of socialization in the natural environment". Behavior Therapy 26 (2): 371–391. doi:10.1016/S0005-7894(05)80111-X. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  145. ^ Snyder, J.; Schepferman, L.; St, C.; Peter, C. (1997). "Origins of antisocial behavior: Negative reinforcement and affect dysregulation of behavior as socialization mechanisms in family interaction". Behavior Modification 21 (2): 187–215. doi:10.1177/01454455970212004. PMID 9086866. 
  146. ^ Snyder, J. & Stoolmiller, M. (2002). Reinforcement and coercion mechanisms in the development of antisocial behavior: The family. In J.B. Reid, G.R. Patterson, & J. Snyder (Eds.) Antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: A developmental analysis and model for intervention. APA Books
  147. ^ Wahler, Robert G. (2004). "Direct and Indirect Reinforcement Processes in Parent Training". JEIBI 1 (2): 120–128. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  148. ^ Patterson, G.R.; Reid, J.B. & Eddy, J.M. (2002). A brief history of the Oregon model. In J.B. Reid, G.R. Patterson & J. Snyder (Eds.) Antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: A developmental analysis and model for interventions. APA Press
  149. ^ Patterson, G.R. (1977). A three stage functional analysis for children's coercive behaviors: A tactic for developing a performance theory. In D. Baer, B.C. Etzel & J.M.L. Blanc (Eds). New developments in behavioral research: Theories, methods, and applications in honour of Sidney W. Bijou. (pp. 59–79). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  150. ^ Patterson, G.R. & Cobb, J.A. (1973). Stimulus control for classes of noxious behavior. In J.F. Knutson (Ed.) The control of aggression: Implications from basic research (pp. 144–199). Chicago: Adline
  151. ^ Osnes, P.G.; Adelinis, J. (2005). "Correspondence Training, Rule Governance, Generalization,and Stimulus Control: Connections or Disconnections?". Behavioral Development Bulletin 1 (1): 48–55. 
  152. ^ Bevill-Davis Alicia, Clees Tom J., Gast David L. (2004). "Correspondence Training: A Review of the Literature". JEIBI 1 (1): 14–27. 
  153. ^ Peleaz, M.; Moreno, R. (1998). "A taxonomy of rules and their correspondence in rule governed behavior". Mexican Journal of Behavior Analysis 24 (2): 197–214. 
  154. ^ Snyder, J.J.; McEachern, A.; Schrepferman, L.; Zettle, R.; Johnson, K.; Swink, N.; McAlpine, C. (2006). "Rule-Governance, Correspondence Training, and Discrimination Learning: A Developmental Analysis of Covert Conduct Problems". Slp-Aba 1 (1): 43–65. 
  155. ^ Barry, L.M.; Haraway, D.L. (2005). "Behavioral Self-Control Strategies for Young Children". JEIBI 2 (2): 79–89. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  156. ^ Ferster, C.B. (1973). "A functional analysis of depression". American Psychologist 28 (10): 857–870. doi:10.1037/h0035605. PMID 4753644. 
  157. ^ Hops, H. (1992). "Parental depression and child behaviour problems: Implications for behavioural family intervention". Behavior Change 9 (3): 126–138. 
  158. ^ Hops, H.; Biglan, A.; Sherman, L. Arhr; Freidman, L.; Osteen, V.; Osteen, V. (1987). "Home observation of family interactions of depressed woman". Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 55 (3): 341–346. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.55.3.341. PMID 3597946. 
  159. ^ Biglan, A.; Hops, H. & Sherman, L. (1988). Coercive family processes and maternal depression. In R.D. Peters & R.J. McMahon (Eds.) Social learning and systems approaches to marriage and family. (pp. 72–103). New York: Brunner/Mazel.
  160. ^ Biglan, A.; Rothlind, J.; Hops, H.; Sherman, L. (1989). "Impact of distressed and aggressive behavior". Journal of Abnormal Psychology 98 (3): 218–228. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.98.3.218. PMID 2768656. 
  161. ^ Kanter, J.W.; Cautilli, J.D.; Busch, A.M.; Baruch, D.E. (2005). "Toward a Comprehensive Functional Analysis of Depressive Behavior: Five Environmental Factors and a Possible Sixth and Seventh". The Behavior Analyst Today 6 (1): 65–74. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  162. ^ In addition to loss of reinforcement, the loss of contingency between behavior and reinforcement can also lead to depression
  163. ^ Rawson, H.E.; Tabb, L.C. (1993). "Effects of therapeutic intervention on childhood depression". Child and Adolesent Social Work Journal 10: 39–53. 
  164. ^ Rawson, H.E.; Cassady, J.C. (1995). "Effects of therapeutic intervention on self-concepts of children with learning disabilities". Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal 12 (1): 19–31. doi:10.1007/BF01876137. 
  165. ^ Kendler, H. & Kendler, T. (1975). From discrimination learning to cognitive development: A neobehavioristic odyessey. In W.K. Estes (Ed.) Handbook of learning and cognitive processes (Vol 1). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum Associaties.
  166. ^ Dunst, C.J.; Raab, M.; Wilson, L.L.; Parkey, C. (2007). "Relative Efficiency Of Stimulation". The Behavior Analyst Today 8 (2): 226–236. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  167. ^ Rondal, J.A.; Docquier, L. (2006). "Maternal Speech To Children With Down Syndrome: An Update". Slp-Aba 1 (3): 218–226. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  168. ^ Hutto, M. (2003). "Latency to learn in contingency studies of young children with disabilities or developmental delays". Bridges 1 (5): 1–16. http://www.researchtopractice.info/bridges/bridges_vol1_no5.pdf. 
  169. ^ Bijou, S.W. (1966). A functional analysis of retarded development. In N.R. Ellis (Ed.) International Review of Research in Mental Retardation. NY: Academic Press.
  170. ^ Greenwood, C.R.; Hart, B.; Walker, D. & Risley, T. (1994). The opportunity to respond and academic performance revisited: A behavioral theory of developmental retardation and its prevention. In R. Gardener, D.M. Sainato, J.O. Cooper, T.E. Heron, W.L. Heward, J. Eshleman & T.A. Grossi (Eds.) Behavior analysis in education: Focus on measurably superior instruction. (pp. 161–171) Pacific Grove, CA: Brookes-Cole
  171. ^ Greenwood, Ward; Luze (2003). "The Early Communication Indicator (ECI) for Infants and Toddlers: What It Is, Where It's Been, and Where It Needs to Go". The Behavior Analyst Today 3 (4): 383–392. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  172. ^ Greer, D.; Keohane, D.; Healy (2002). "Quality and Comprehensive Applications of Behavior Analysis to Schooling". The Behavior Analyst Today 3 (2): 120–132. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  173. ^ Greenwood, C.R.; Carta, J.J.; Hart, B.; Kamps, D.; Terry, D.; Delquardi, J.C.; Walker, D.; Risley, T.R. et al. (1992). "Out of the laboratory and into the community: Twenty-six years of applied behavior analysis at Juniper Gardens Children Center". American Psychologist 47 (11): 1464–1474. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.47.11.1464. PMID 1482007. 
  174. ^ Bijou, S.W. (1983). The prevention of mild and moderate retarded development. In F.J. Menolascino, R. Neman & J.A. Stark (Eds.) Curative aspects of mental retardation: Biomedical and behavioral advances. (pp. 223–241). Baltimore: Brookes.
  175. ^ Hart, B. & Risley, T.R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore: Brookes
  176. ^ Hart, B. & Risley, T.R. (1999). The social world of children learning to talk. Baltimore: Brookes
  177. ^ Zentall, T.R.; Galizio, M.; Critchfield, T.S. (2002). "Categorization, concept learning, and behavior analysis: An introduction". Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 78 (3): 237–248. doi:10.1901/jeab.2002.78-237. PMC 1284898. PMID 12507002. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1284898. 
  178. ^ Goldiamond, I. (1966). Perception, language, and conceptualization rules. In B. Kleinmutz (Ed.) Carnegie Institute of Technology Annual Symposium on Cognition. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
  179. ^ Becker, W.C. (1971). Teaching concepts and operations, or how to make kids smart. In W.C. Becker (Ed.) An empirical basis for changing education. Science research associates. Palo Alto, CA.
  180. ^ Herrnstein, R. (1990). "Levels of stimulus control: A. functional approach". Cognition 37 (1–2): 133–166. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(90)90021-B. PMID 2269005. 
  181. ^ Quine, W.V.O. (1953). From a logical point of view. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  182. ^ Quine, W.V.O. (1960). Word and Object. Cambridge. MA: MIT Press.
  183. ^ Hawkins, A.S. (1964). "Verbal identification of stimulus components in ambiguously named compounds". Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 1 (3): 227–240. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(64)90038-4. 
  184. ^ Steiner, T.E.; Sobel, R. (1968). "Intercomponent association formation during paired-associate training with compound stimuli". Journal of Experimental Psychology 77 (2): 275–280. doi:10.1037/h0025778. PMID 5655120. 
  185. ^ Blackledge (2003). "An Introduction to Relational Frame Theory: Basics and Applications". The Behavior Analyst Today 3 (4): 421–430. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  186. ^ Barnes-Holmes, Yvonne; McHugh, Louise; Barnes-Holmes, Dermot (2004). "Perspective-Taking and Theory of Mind: A Relational Frame Account". The Behavior Analyst Today 5 (1): 15–25. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  187. ^ Hayes, S.C.; Hayes, L.J. (1992). "Verbal relations and the evolution of behavior analysis". American Psychologist 47 (11): 1383–1395. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.47.11.1383. 
  188. ^ Roche, B; Barnes-Holmes, Y; Barnes-Holmes, D; Stewart, I; O'Hora, D. (2002). "Relational Frame Theory: A new paradigm for the analysis of social behavior". The Behavior Analyst 25: 75–91. 
  189. ^ Esper, E.A. (1925). A technique for the experimental investigation of associative inference in artificial linguistic systems. Language Monographs No. 1.
  190. ^ Wetherby, B. (1978). Miniature language and the functional analysis of verbal behavior. In R. Schiefelbusch (Ed.) Bases of language intervention. (pp. 397–448). Baltimore: University Park Press.
  191. ^ Sidman, M. (2000). "Equivalence relations and the reinforcement contingency". Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 74 (1): 127–146. doi:10.1901/jeab.2000.74-127. PMC 1284788. PMID 10966100. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1284788. 
  192. ^ Krasner, L. (1958). "Studies of conditioning of verbal behavior". Psychological Bulletin 55 (3): 148–170. doi:10.1037/h0040492. PMID 13542700. 
  193. ^ Salzinger, K. (1959). "Experimental manipulation of verbal behavior: A review". Journal of General Psychology 61 (1): 65–94. doi:10.1080/00221309.1959.9710241. PMID 14441175. 
  194. ^ Salzinger, K. (1967). The problem of response class in verbal behavior. In K. Salzinger & S. Salzinger (Eds.) Research in verbal behavior and some neurophysical implications. Academic Press, New York.
  195. ^ Sailor, W. (1971). "Reinforcement and generalization of productive plural allomorphs in two retarded children". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 4 (4): 305–310. doi:10.1901/jaba.1971.4-305. PMC 1310708. PMID 16795307. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1310708. 
  196. ^ Baer, D.M. (1982). The imposition of structure on behavior and the demolition of behavioral structures. In H.E. Howe (Ed.) Nebraska symposium on motivation, 29, 217–254.
  197. ^ Baer, D.M.; Guess, D. (1973). "Teaching productive noun suffixes to severely retarded children". American Journal of Mental Deficiency 77 (5): 498–505. PMID 4122226. 
  198. ^ Andronis, P.T.; Lang, T.V.J.; Goldiamond, I. (1997). "Contingency adduction of "symbolic aggression" by pigeon". The Analysis of Verbal Behavior 16: 10–23. 
  199. ^ Bucher, B.; Schneider, R.E. (1973). "Acquisition and generalization of conservation by pre-schoolers, using operant training". Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 16 (2): 187–204. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(73)90160-4. 
  200. ^ Waghorn, L.; Sullivan, E.V. (1970). "The exploration of transition rules in conservation of quantity (substance) using film mediated modeling". Acta Psychologica 32 (1): 65–80. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(70)90091-0. PMID 5497127. 
  201. ^ a b Field, D. (1987). "A review of preschool conservation training: An analysis of analyses". Developmental Review 7 (3): 210–251. doi:10.1016/0273-2297(87)90013-X. 
  202. ^ Ferster, C.B. (1961). "Positive reinforcement and the behavioral deficits of autistic children". Child Development 32: 437–456. PMID 13699189. 
  203. ^ Drash, P.W.; Tudor, R.M. (1993). "A functional analysis of verbal delay in preschool children: Implications for prevention and total recovery". The Analysis of Verbal Behavior 11: 19–29. 
  204. ^ Lovaas, O.I.; Smith, T. (1989). "A comprehensive behavior theory of autistic children: Paradigm for research and treatment". Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry 20 (1): 17–29. doi:10.1016/0005-7916(89)90004-9. PMID 2671048. 
  205. ^ Bijou, S.W. & Ghezzi, P.M. (1999). The behavior interference theory of autistic behavior in young children. In P.M. Ghezzi, W.L. Williams & J.E. Carr (Eds.), Autism: Behavior analytic perspectives. (pp. 33–43). Reno, NV: Context Press.
  206. ^ Hixson, M.D.; Wilson, J.L.; Doty, S.J. & Vladescu, J.C. (2008). A Review of the Behavioral Theories of Autism and Evidence for an Environmental Etiology. Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Applied Behavior Analysis. Special Compiled Issue 2.4 - 3.1, 46–59.
  207. ^ Engelmann, S. & Carnine, D. (1991). Theory of instruction: Principles and applications. Eugene, OR: ADI Press
  208. ^ Englemann, S.E. (1968). "Relating operant techniques to programming and teaching". Journal of School Psychology 6 (2): 89–96. doi:10.1016/0022-4405(68)90002-2. 
  209. ^ Calkin, A.B. (2005). "Precision teaching: the standard celeration charts" (PDF). Behav Analyst Today 6 (4): 207–16. http://www.baojournal.com. 
  210. ^ Scott, T.M. Gagnon; Nelson, C.M. (2008). "School-Wide Systems of Positive Behavior Support: A Framework for Reducing School Crime and Violence". Journal of Behavior Analysis of Offender and Victim: Treatment and Prevention 1 (4): 69–80. 
  211. ^ "Child Development" Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. 2001. 5 February 2008. http://www.nwrel.org/request/june01/child.html
  212. ^ Meltz, Barbara F. "Zora and the explorer" The Boston Globe October 22, 2007 Globe Newspaper Company 5 February 2008 http://www.boston.com/news/globe/living/articles/2007/10/22/zora_and_the_explorer
  213. ^ "Language Development In Children" Child Development Institute, LLC 1998–2007. 5 February 2008. http://www.childdevelopmentinfo.com/development/language_development.shtml
  214. ^ Golden, J. (2007). "Editorial – Introduction – Children with behavioral and emotional problems: Is their behavior explained only by complex learning, or do internal motives have a role?". International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy 3 (4): 449–476. 
  215. ^ Aideuis, D. (2007). "Promoting Attachment and Emotional Regulation of Children with Complex Trauma Disorder". International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy 3 (4): 546–555. 
  216. ^ Commons, M.L.; Miller, P.M. (2001). "A Quantitative Behavioral Model of Developmental Stage Based upon the Model of Hierarchical Complexity". The Behavior Analyst Today 2 (3): 222–252. 
  217. ^ Commons, M.L.; Trudeau, E.J.; Stein, S.A.; Richards, F.A.; Krause, S.R. (1998). "Hierarchical Complexity of Tasks Shows the Existence of Developmental Stages". Developmental Review 8 (3): 237–278. 
  218. ^ Commons, M.L.; Miller, P.M. (1998). "A quantitative behavior-analytic theory of development". Mexican Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior 24 (2): 153–180. 
  219. ^ Novak, G. & Pelaez, M. (2004). Child and adolescent development: A behavioral systems approach. Sage
  220. ^ Novak, G.; Pelaez, M. (2002). "A behavior-analytic developmental model is better". Behavior and Brain Sciences 25: 466–468. 
  221. ^ Morison, Sara J. & Ann-Louise Ellwood. "Resiliency in the Aftermath of Deprivation: A Second Look at the Development of Romanian Orphanage Children." Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 46.4 (Oct 2000): 717. Academic OneFile. Gale. University of Minnesota Duluth. 25 February 2008
  222. ^ [1]

External links