A Comparison of Bidirectional Naming for Familiar and Non-Familiar Stimuli and the Effects of a Repeated Probe Procedure for First Grade Students

The experimenter conducted three experiments to compare incidental language acquisition of familiar and non-familiar stimuli, and asses the effects of specific pairing experiences on the emergence of bidirectional naming (BiN) for familiar and non-familiar stimuli. In Experiment I the experimenter assessed the numbers of accurate untaught listener and speaker responses for familiar and non-familiar stimuli emitted by 20 first-grade participants following incidental naming experiences. A statistical comparison of the results using a dependent paired samples t-tests revealed significant differences across familiar and non-familiar stimuli for: (a) listener responses, (b) speaker tact responses, and (c) speaker intraverbal tact responses. In Experiment II, the experimenter tested the effectiveness of a repeated probe procedure on the emergence of BiN for familiar and non-familiar stimuli using a combined multiple probe and simultaneous treatment design. Six participants were selected from Experiment I based on their absence of BiN for non-familiar stimuli. The experimenter implemented a repeated probe intervention procedure across two treatment conditions: (1) non-familiar stimuli sets and (2) mixed (non-familiar and familiar) stimuli sets. Following each intervention phase, post-intervention naming probe results demonstrated increased numbers of accurate untaught listener and speaker responses for familiar and non-familiar stimuli by all participants. Time constraints of the school year limited completion of the intervention for 2 participant dyads. Findings suggested the potential effectiveness of the repeated probe procedure. Experiment III was a systematic replication of Experiment II with 6 different participants. Results demonstrated the emergence of: (a) BiN for non-familiar stimuli by five participants; and (b) BiN for familiar stimuli by all participants who demonstrated absence during pre-intervention probe sessions. Findings from Experiments II and III suggested that the repeated probe procedure effectively functioned as a conditioning procedure for the emergence of conditioned reinforcement for observing responses to visual and vocal familiar and non-familiar stimuli. That is, the repeated probe procedure shifted the reinforcement effects of conditioned stimuli to previously neutral stimuli, bringing one’s observing responses under a new stimulus control. This stimulus control (i.e., reinforcement effects) embedded within functioned to select out the participant’s observing responses during incidental naming experiences.