ERIC EJ606560: Effects of Adult Contingent Imitation on Development of Young Children's Vocal Imitation.

13 Pages·2000·0.13 MB·English

by  ERIC

Journal of Early Intervention
http://jei.sagepub.com
Effects of Adult Contingent Imitation on Development of Young Children's Vocal
Imitation
Gail Gazdag and Steven F. Warren
Journal of Early Intervention 2000; 23; 24
DOI: 10.1177/10538151000230010701
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://jei.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/23/1/24
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children
Additional services and information for Journal of Early Intervention can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://jei.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://jei.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations (this article cites 15 articles hosted on the
SAGE Journals Online and HighWire Press platforms):
http://jei.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/23/1/24
Downloaded from http://jei.sagepub.com by M Peterson on May 28, 2008
© 2000 Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
JournalofEarlyIntervention,2000
Vol.23,No.1,24–35
Copyright2000bytheDivisionofEarlyChildhood,CouncilforExceptionalChildren
REGULAR ARTICLES
Effects of Adult Contingent Imitation on
Development of Young Children’s
Vocal Imitation
GAIL GAZDAG
Vanderbilt University
STEVEN F. WARREN
University of Kansas
The effects of adult contingent vocal imitation on the development of vocal imitation skills by
three young children with mental retardation were investigated. A multiple baseline across
subjects design was implemented. Generalization sessions were conducted separately with both
the children’s teacher and teaching assistant. Child vocal imitation to adult contingent
imitation, elicited imitation, and spontaneous imitation were measured in generalization
sessions throughout the study. All children vocally imitated in response to adult contingent
imitation during training. Minimal generalization to adult contingent imitation and elicited
imitation prompts were shown by the children. Moderate to strong generalized increases in
spontaneous imitation occurred for all children concurrent with training.
There are numerous strategies that children (reduced) vocal imitation (Sokolov, 1992).
conceivablymightusetolearnlanguageskills Exact imitation occurs when ‘‘sounds in the
including hypothesis testing and rule genera- source and response utterances match exact-
tion (Chomsky, 1965), verbal rehearsal (Orn- ly’’(Sokolov,p. 209).Partialimitationoccurs
stein, Naus, & Liberty, 1975), observational when the ‘‘response utterance contains partial
learning (Bandura, 1977), and vocal imitation repetition with deletions but no additions’’
(Warren & Bambara, 1989). Within a social, (Sokolov, p. 209).
interactive context the child might use these The skill of vocal imitation ‘‘is one of the
and other strategies to take advantage of a di- earliest communicative strategies used by
verse range of language-learning opportuni- children’’(Sokolov&Moreton,1993,p.174).
ties.Thechild’simitationofanadult’ssounds, Vocal imitation may play a variety of roles in
gestures, words and expressions is a skill and the facilitation of language development (i.e.,
astrategythatmanychildrenuseinthecourse cognitive,pragmatic,informationprocessing).
of early communication and language devel- Immediate, deferred, exact, partial (reduced),
opment (Masur, 1993; 1995; Snow, 1981). modified (expanded), spontaneous, and elicit-
Thepurposeofthisstudywastoinvestigate ed imitation reflect variations of the form of
the effects of adult contingent vocal imitation imitationandalsomayfunctiondifferently,or
ofchildren’svocalizationsonthedevelopment not at all, at different developmental periods
of children’s own vocal imitation skills. The (Speidel & Nelson, 1989).
study focused on children’s exact and partial Child vocal imitation has been the focus of
24 JEI, 2000, 23:1
Downloaded from http://jei.sagepub.com by M Peterson on May 28, 2008
© 2000 Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
numerous studies (Speidel & Nelson, 1989). (Dawson & Lewy). Fourth, adult contingent
For example, it has been positively correlated imitation facilitates attention to the adult
withlanguagelearninginchildrenwithautism (Dawson & Galpert, 1987; Dawson & Lewy,
(Yoder & Layton, 1988). Vocal imitation has 1989; Klinger & Dawson, 1992). That is, the
been shown to assist in the generation of lon- childmaybemorelikelytoattendtotheadult
ger utterances (Speidel & Herreshoff, 1989), and the adult’s actions, rather than his or her
and the development of spontaneous speech own actions, if the adult’s actions are a rep-
(Speidel, 1989). The acquisition of new vo- lication of the child’s own recent actions.
cabulary (Rodgon & Kurdek, 1977) and new Adult contingentimitation wasfoundtoin-
grammatical structures (Whitehurst & Vasta, crease attention to the respondent in 4 - to 6-
1975) has been attributed to vocal imitation. year-oldchildrenwithautism(Dawson&Ad-
Infants’ early imitation of words not in their ams, 1984), in 2- to 6-year-old children with
repertoirespredictsandmayfacilitatetheirfu- autism (Dawson & Galpert, 1987), and in
ture lexical development (Masur, 1995). high-risk preterm, typically developing, and
There is a reported progression in the de- postmature infants (3½ months; Field, 1977).
velopment of vocal imitation. Children typi- Contingentimitationhasalsobeenreportedto
cally progress from partial (or reduced) imi-
decrease attention to objects by children with
tations, to exact imitations, to expanded imi-
autism while increasing their social vocaliza-
tations(Kucjaz,1983;Snow,1981).Expanded
tions (vocalizations directed to another per-
(modified)imitationoccurswhentheresponse
son)andthecomplexityoftheirplay(Dawson
utterance contains an additional sound or
& Galpert). Dawson and her colleagues have
sounds of at least part of the source utterance
used contingent imitation with children with
(Snow,1981).Therealsoisevidencethatchil-
autism because it is thought to ‘‘promote so-
drentypicallyengageinspontaneousimitation
cial responsiveness’’ (Dawson &Lewy,1989,
(imitations of utterances that have not been
p.63).DawsonandLewynotedthatimitation
directly modeled) prior to being able to re-
is a form of early interaction which can serve
spondtoelicitedimitationprompts(utterances
as a strategy with children at early develop-
that are directly modeled; Snow, 1989). The
mental levels.
developmental progression of imitation abili-
The use of adult contingent vocal imitation
ties generally correlates with children’s
as a strategy to enhance child vocal imitation
emerging cognitive and linguistic abilities
has been reported in a few studies of early
(Speidel & Nelson, 1989; Locke, 1993).
communication intervention. For example,
One strategy for facilitating the develop-
Warren, Yoder, Gazdag, Kim & Jones (1993)
ment of vocal imitation may be adult contin-
found moderate increases in child vocal imi-
gent imitation of the child. Contingent imita-
tation as a result of a more general interven-
tionisanimitationofthechild’svocalorges-
tion(i.e.prelinguisticmilieuteaching)thatin-
tural behavior that the respondent (i.e., prac-
cluded contingent imitation of the child’s vo-
titioner, parent) produces immediately
calizations. Adult contingent imitation also
following the child’s production. The positive
aspectsoftheuseofadultcontingentimitation has been included as part of a set ofinterven-
maybefour-fold.First,bynoticingtheadult’s tion techniques taught to parents (McCollum
imitation of their behavior, the child may in & Stayton, 1985; Mahoney & Powell, 1988).
turnlearntoimitate(Snow,1989).Second,by As yet, however, no studies have reported the
regulating their rate and varying their form, a independent effects of adult contingent imi-
childcaninfluenceandregulatetheamountof tation on the development of imitation by
adult input that is similar to the child’s pro- young children with mental retardation.
duction (Dawson & Lewy, 1989). Third, it is Therefore, the purpose of the present study
likely a child will process and reproduce an was to determine the effects of adult contin-
adult’s production because it is exactly the gent vocal imitation on the acquisition and
same as the child’s most recent production generalization of elicited and spontaneousvo-
Gazdag & Warren 25
Downloaded from http://jei.sagepub.com by M Peterson on May 28, 2008
© 2000 Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
Table 1.
Participant Information
Agea
Child Agea MDIb equivalent Other
Alan 29 (cid:1)50, 48* 18 Mild cerebralpalsy
Brad 28 50 17.5 Bilingual home
Carl 26 (cid:1)50, 46* 15.5 Down Syndrome
aAgereportedinmonths.
bMDI(cid:2)MentalDevelopmentalIndex.
*Naglieriextrapolation.
cal imitation by three young children with ulus generalization sessions throughout the
mental retardation. study, and the posttests. During sessions in
whichchildbehaviorwasvideotaped,allchild
METHOD vocal imitations also were recorded.
Subjects and Setting
Adult Behaviors
Threechildrenbetween26and29monthspar-
ticipated in this study. Each child’s imitative Two adult behaviors were measured: (a)adult
abilities were assessed by providing opportu- contingent vocal imitation, and (b) adult
nities to imitate in response to (a) adult con- prompt for vocal imitation. Adult contingent
tingent imitation, (b) elicited prompts, and (c) vocal imitation occurred when the adult ex-
any other adult vocalization or verbalization. actly or partially repeated the child’s imme-
During a 10-minute screening session each diately preceding vocalization or when the
child produced a minimum of five vocaliza- adult modified (expanded) her vocal imitation
tions and showed minimal imitation skills. of the child by including an additional sound
Etiology was determined by reviewingschool or sounds to the child’s vocalization (e.g. ‘‘ba
records. No child exhibited significant hear- ba’’ in response to ‘‘ba’’). An adult prompt
ing, vision, or behavioral problems as deter- for vocal imitation occurred when the adult
mined through examination of school records askedthechildtoproduceasound,andwaited
and consultation with each child’s teachers. at least 5 seconds for the child to respond.
Table 1 displays specific characteristics for When the adult said, ‘‘Say, (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)’’ or ‘‘Tell me,
each child. (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1),’’ an adult prompt for vocal imitation was
All three children attended a community- recorded.
based early intervention program. All experi-
mental sessions and generalization tests with Observation System
the children’s teachers were conducted in a Data were collected via videotape during
playroom near the child’s classroom. The screenings, experimental sessions, generaliza-
playroom was equipped with a low table and tion sessions, and posttests. All screenings,
chairs, and a wide variety of age appropriate generalization sessions, and posttests were 10
toys and play materials. All screenings, gen- minutes in length. All baseline sessions and
eralization tests with the children’s teaching 20% of the intervention sessions were video-
assistant, and posttests were conducted in the taped and coded. Although experimental ses-
child’s classroom. sionstypicallywereconductedfor20minutes,
only a 10-minute portion of each session was
Child Behavior videotaped. Therefore, each individual data
The training target was the child’s vocal imi- point represents a 10-minute sample of data.
tations of adult vocal imitations of the child. Two adultbehaviorsandonetrainingtarget
It was measured during the screenings, the were coded for each data session. Determi-
baseline period, the training period, the stim- nation of child imitation to adult contingent
26 JEI, 2000, 23:1
Downloaded from http://jei.sagepub.com by M Peterson on May 28, 2008
© 2000 Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
imitation, spontaneous imitation, and elicited Screenings, generalization tests, and post-
imitation was dependent upon the coding of tests. Screenings, generalization tests with
adult behavior preceding child vocal imita- the teaching assistant, and posttests werecon-
tion. ducted to determine children’s abilities to im-
itate initially, over the course of the interven-
Interobserver Agreement tion,andafterinterventionended.Onescreen-
Interobserver agreement on the observational ing test, one half of the generalization tests,
code was assessed by having the primary and andoneposttestwereconductedbythechild’s
secondary observer simultaneously but inde- teaching assistant. Two screenings were con-
pendently code the same 10-minute segment ducted by the trainer. Testing sessions always
of videotaped data. These records were then wereconducted inthechild’sclassroomusing
comparedsequentiallyonapoint-by-pointba- classroomtoys.Peersdidnotparticipateinthe
sis for agreementofexactcodingofadultand testing sessions.
child behaviors. A disagreement occurred To insure we did not confound the child’s
when one observer recorded a different code abilitytovocallyimitatewithhisorherability
fromtheotherorwhenoneobserverrecorded to produce various sounds, only phonemes
theoccurrenceofabehaviorandtheotherob- previouslyproducedbythechild(asmeasured
server failed to record any occurrence. Reli- in familiarity sessions) were used to test the
ability wascalculatedforeachcategoryinthe child’s imitation ability during the screenings.
observation system and for each utteranceus- Likewise,phonemesmadebythechildduring
inganexactagreementprocedureinwhichthe previous sessions were used during general-
total number of agreements was divided by ization tests with the teaching assistant and
the total number of agreements plus disagree- posttests to test the child’s imitation abilities.
ments and multiplied by 100. Reliability as- The ability to imitate an adult contingent
sessments, evenly distributedacrossallexper- imitation was assessed by the adult contin-
imental conditions, were conducted on 25.3% gently imitating the child’s vocalization. The
of the observations made for baseline, train- adult remained silent for at least 5 seconds to
ing, and generalization. give the child time to imitate. In order to as-
Overallinterobserveragreementwas88.5% sessspontaneousimitation,theadultproduced
(range (cid:2) 82.4–100%). On adult contingent a sentence ending in a word that included a
imitation, interobserveragreementwas89.7% sound the child had produced previously.The
(range (cid:2) 86.8–92.6%) and on adult prompts adult then remained silent for 5 seconds to
for imitation, agreement was 98.0% (range (cid:2) givethechildtimetorespond.Thechildcould
94.4–100%).Forchildvocalimitationtoadult spontaneously imitate any adult vocalization.
contingent imitation, interobserver agreement During the same test, the adult assessed the
was 82.4% (range (cid:2) 66.7–100%), for child child’s elicited imitation ability. The adult
vocal imitation to adult prompt for imitation asked the child to imitateamodeledphoneme
it was 100%, and for child spontaneous imi- by saying, ‘‘Say, (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1),’’ and waiting at least 5
tation it was 88% (range (cid:2) 80.0–100%). secondsforaresponse.Thephonememodeled
by the adult was one the child had produced
Experimental Procedures previously. Five opportunities for imitationof
Experimentaldesign. Amultiplebaselinede- adult contingent imitation, of models, and of
sign across subjects (McReynolds & Kearns, words with familiar sounds were providedfor
1983) was used to assess the intervention ef- each child during each of these testing con-
fects.Afterabaselinemeasurementperiod,in- ditions.
tervention was sequentially introduced across All tests were conducted separately with
the children. Tests of generalization occurred eachchild.Imitationabilitieswereeithernon-
four times during baseline and approximately existentorwereexhibitedatalowrateduring
every third videotaped session throughout the screenings. Frequency of imitation per oppor-
study. tunity during the screening is summarized in
Gazdag & Warren 27
Downloaded from http://jei.sagepub.com by M Peterson on May 28, 2008
© 2000 Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
Table 2. materials for the initial play activity. Alan,
Frequency of Imitation per Opportunities Brad and Carl had 5, 8, and 11 baseline ses-
During Screenings sions, respectively.
Intervention. Environmental arrangement,
No. child No. child No. child
following the child’s attentional lead, and the
imitations/ imitations/ spon-
No. adult No. adult taneous creation of social routines provided enabling
contingent elicited imita- contexts (Warren & Yoder, 1998) for deter-
Child imitations imitations tions1 mining whether adult contingent vocal imita-
tion directly taught child vocal imitation. The
Alan 2/20 2/14 1
trainer offered the child toys and the child
Brad 0/15 0/15 1
Carl 1/17 0/17 0 could chose a toy by looking, vocalizing, or
reaching. For example, the trainer offered the
1Duringa30minutefreeplayperiod.
child a doll and said, ‘‘Oh, do you want this
doll?’’ The child vocalized ‘‘Da.’’ After the
Table 2. Posttests were also conducted sepa- child vocalized, the trainer immediately imi-
rately for each child 2 weeks after the last tated thechild’s vocalizationbysaying,‘‘Da’’
training session. (anexactvocalimitation)or‘‘Dado’’(amod-
Baseline. All baseline and intervention ified imitation). Modified imitations were al-
sessions were conducted by one trainer who lowed because a novel variation on a child’s
was experienced in facilitating the acquisition utterance might draw the child’s attention to
of prelinguistic communication, specifically the utterance. Furthermore, modifications are
requesting, commenting, and vocal imitation often used by parents when they contingently
(Warrenetal.,1993).Duringthebaselinecon- imitate vocalizations of their typically devel-
dition the trainer engaged in interactive play opingchildren(Speidel&Nelson,1989).Fol-
activitieswitheachchildforapproximately20 lowing thefirst imitation,thetrainerwaitedat
minutes four times per week. Five opportu- least 5 seconds for the child to respond. A
nities for the child to vocally imitate adult second adult contingent vocal imitation oc-
contingent vocal imitation were embedded in curred when the child and trainer engaged in
each play session. No other techniques for a social play routine of feeding dolls. The
teaching imitation were utilized. The trainer trainer said, ‘‘Oh, look! The baby is drinking
provided opportunities for the child to imitate milk. Good baby.’’ The child said,‘‘Ba.’’The
spontaneously by vocalizing phonemes that trainer then said, ‘‘Ba ba ba’’ and waited at
were in each child’s repertoire. After the vo- least 5 seconds for the child’s response.
calization was provided, the trainer remained Theadultprovidedanaverageof31,29and
silent for at least 5 seconds in order to give 43 contingent vocal imitations during video-
the child time to respond. taped intervention sessions with Alan, Brad
Theadultwasalsovocallyresponsivetothe and Carl, respectively. The frequencyofadult
child’svocalizations.Forexample,ifthechild contingent vocal imitations was relativelysta-
said, ‘‘Ah ba,’’ the adult might have respond- bleforeachchildthroughouttheintervention.
ed, ‘‘Oh, really!’’ Thus, the adult encouraged Therangeofadultcontingentvocalimitations
the child to produce vocalizations but did not was 23 to 53 for Alan, 18 to 38 for Brad,and
directly teach imitation. No elicited imitation 28 to 57 for Carl. Individual variations in fre-
opportunitiesoccurredduringthebaselineses- quency of child vocalizations determined the
sions. Developmentally appropriate practices opportunities that were available to the adult
suchasenvironmentalarrangement,following to respond with contingent vocal imitations.
thechild’sattentionallead,andcreationofso- Not all child vocalizations were imitated.
cial routines, were provided during these play Initially the child was offered access to
sessions to insure a high rate of child engage- threedifferenttoysoractivities.Asthechild’s
mentwiththetrainer(Warren,1991).Sessions interest naturally waned from their first selec-
beganasthetrainerandthechildselectedplay tion, other toys and activities were presented
28 JEI, 2000, 23:1
Downloaded from http://jei.sagepub.com by M Peterson on May 28, 2008
© 2000 Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
forasecondselection.Additionaltoysandac- vide five models of familiar phonemes to the
tivitiescontinuedtobeprovidedasthechild’s child. In addition, to give the child an oppor-
interest waned. Typical activities included tunity to spontaneously imitate a familiar
music, dolls, water play, farm, cars, and ball. sound, the adult was asked to provide five
Followingthechild’sattentionalleadwasem- short sentences that ended in a word that in-
ployed to help sustain the child’s interest in cluded a previously expressed vocalization of
the activity. Alan, Brad, and Carl participated that child. They were stated without a prompt
in 42, 33, and 36 training sessions, respec- or model (e.g., ‘‘Oh, I see the ball.’’), and the
tively. teacher waited at least 5 seconds for the child
Fidelity of treatment. A fidelity of treat- to respond. The child could, of course, spon-
ment measure was used to assure that these taneously imitate any vocalization that the
general teaching techniques were used adult had produced.
throughoutbothbaselineandinterventionses-
sions, and that adult contingent imitation was RESULTS
used only during intervention sessions. Fidel-
ity of treatment was measured for 15% of the Figure 1 displays the frequency of the trainer
recorded experimental (baseline and training) and the teaching assistant’s imitation to child
sessions by an independent observer. The fi- vocalizations. The frequency of child imita-
delity of treatment measure consisted of eight tive responses is also displayed. These data
questions. Six of these questions were de- reflect the total number of training promptsto
signed to assure that the adult followed the whichthechildrenrespondedduringtreatment
child’slead,engagedinplayroutines,imitated and the total number of adult contingent imi-
the child’smotorbehavior,vocallyresponded, tation probes to which children responded
encouragedthechildtovocalize,allowedtime during generalization with the teaching assis-
for the child to speak, and made availableap- tant.
propriate toys during both baseline and train- During the training condition, Alan, Brad,
ing sessions. The two additional questions andCarlaveraged,respectively,14.2,9.0,and
were designed to distinguish the adult’s be- 19.7 imitations to adult contingent imitations
haviors between baseline and training. The per session (respective total imitations were
questions addressed whether the adult vocally 114, 63, and 138). This compared to 3, 5,and
imitated the child’s vocalizations and whether 3 total imitations, respectively, (average 0.6,
the adult made statements to elicit vocal imi- 0.6, and 0.3, per session) to adult contingent
tations from the child. The choice of answers imitation probes by the trainer during base-
included almost always, most of the time, oc- line. Clearly, there was a substantial increase
casionally, rarely, and never. Agreement on in the slope of all three children’simitationto
the lack of occurrences of elicited imitation adult contingent imitation.
during baseline and training sessions was Alan, Brad and Carl produced a total of 3,
100%. Adult contingent imitation was found 0, and 0 imitations to adult contingent imita-
to occur rarely (100%) during baseline and tions, respectively, during generalization tests
was recorded as occurring most of the time with the teaching assistant during baseline.
(40%) or always (60%) during training. This compared with a total of 5, 1, and 1 im-
Generalizationwiththechildren’steachers. itations to adult contingent imitations, respec-
Each child’s primary teacher conducted one tively, during generalization tests with the
half of the stimulus generalization sessions in teaching assistant concurrent with training.
the training room using training toys. Spon- During the posttest with the teaching assis-
taneous imitation and elicited imitation were tant, Alan, Brad and Carl imitated 3, 1 and 1
tested during these generalization probes. adult contingent imitations, respectively. The
Only those phonemes previously used by the teaching assistant offered 7, 6 and 5 oppor-
child were modeled during elicited imitation tunities of adult contingent imitation, respec-
opportunities. The teacher was asked to pro- tively, to the children during these posttests.
Gazdag & Warren 29
Downloaded from http://jei.sagepub.com by M Peterson on May 28, 2008
© 2000 Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
Figure 1.
Open circles indicate frequency of adult contingent imitation of the child (ACI) by trainer; dark
circles indicate frequencyof child vocal imitations (CVI)inresponsetotheACIs.FrequencyofACIs
by teaching assistant during generalization probes indicated by the bars; shaded portion of bar
indicates CVIs in response to ACIs.
30 JEI, 2000, 23:1
Downloaded from http://jei.sagepub.com by M Peterson on May 28, 2008
© 2000 Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
Figure2displaysthenumberofchildvocal DISCUSSION
imitationstoadultpromptsforimitation(elic-
There was a substantial increase in all three
ited imitation prompts) during generalization
children’s elicited vocal imitation in the train-
testsconcurrentwiththebaseline,intervention
ing setting concurrent with the intervention.
and posttest conditions. No substantialchang-
None of the children, however, showed an in-
es in imitations in response to elicited imita-
crease in elicited vocal imitation in response
tion prompts from baseline to intervention
to adult contingent imitation or elicited imi-
were evident for the three children during the
tation prompts in the generalization and post-
generalization testswiththeteachingassistant
test sessions.
orwiththeteacher,orduringtheposttestwith
The lack of generalization may have been
the teaching assistant.
duetoineffectiveorinsufficienttraining.That
Figure 3 displays the children’s spontane-
is, had training been different, more intense,
ous imitation during treatment sessions with
or of longer duration, perhaps the children
the trainer and the generalization sessions
would have generalized elicited imitation to
withboththeteachingassistantandtheteach-
other individuals and settings. We think a
er. Opportunities for spontaneous imitations
more likely explanation, however, is that the
were continuously available during all ses-
children had not achieved a level of cognitive
sions.
development sufficient to acquire generalized
During baseline sessions Alan, Brad and
elicitedimitationabilities.Weviewthisasthe
Carl spontaneously imitated the trainer’s vo-
most likely explanation for their failure to
calizations a total of 2, 2, and 0 times, re-
generalize the skill in part due to their con-
spectively. During intervention Alan, Brad,
current development of spontaneous imitation
and Carlrespondedwithatotalof10,19,and
abilities.
10 spontaneous imitations, respectively.
Snow’s (1989) research suggests that spon-
During the baseline generalization sessions
taneous imitation typically develops prior to
with the teaching assistant, Alan, Brad, and
elicited imitation abilities. All three children
Carl each produced a total of 1 spontaneous
showed moderate to strong generalized in-
imitation. During generalization sessions with
creases intheirspontaneousimitationabilities
the teaching assistant, conducted concurrent
concurrent with the intervention (see Figure
with intervention, Alan, Brad, and Carl pro-
3). The consistency of this effect suggests it
duced a total of 8, 6, and 2 spontaneous imi-
wasaresultoftheintervention.Thisindicates
tations. A five- to six-fold increase in average
that the children were beginning to develop
spontaneous imitations during generalization
thenecessarycognitiveabilitiestovocallyim-
with the teaching assistant occurred for Alan itate,buthadnotprogressedsufficientlytoac-
and Brad. Carl’s average spontaneous imita- quire elicited imitation abilities as a direct re-
tionwiththeteachingassistantdidnotchange sult of adult contingent imitation.
from the baseline to the generalization ses- Thefailureoftheinterventiontoeffectelic-
sions conducted during intervention. ited imitation and its apparent success at fa-
During the baseline generalization sessions cilitating the development of spontaneous im-
with the teacher, Alan, Brad, and Carl pro- itation supports earlier findings (Snow, 1989;
duced a total of 0, 1, and 0 spontaneous imi- Speidel & Nelson, 1989) that generalized
tations, respectively. During generalization spontaneous imitation precedes the ability to
sessions with the teacher, conducted concur- engage in generalized elicited imitation. This
rent with intervention, Alan, Brad, and Carl suggests that an intervention aimed at estab-
produced a total of 3, 8, and 3 spontaneous lishing elicited imitation abilities should first
imitations, respectively. During the posttest verify the existence of spontaneous imitation
sessions conducted by the teaching assistant abilities. If the child is not spontaneously im-
Alan, Brad, and Carl produced 5, 1 and 2 itating, then emphasis should first be placed
spontaneous imitations, respectively. on assisting the development of this ability.
Gazdag & Warren 31
Downloaded from http://jei.sagepub.com by M Peterson on May 28, 2008
© 2000 Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.
Figure 2.
Adult prompts for imitation by the teacher (T) or teaching assistant (TA) is indicated by the bar.
Child vocal imitation in response to these prompts is indicated by the crossed lines on the bar
(heavier lines for responses to the teaching assistant).
32 JEI, 2000, 23:1
Downloaded from http://jei.sagepub.com by M Peterson on May 28, 2008
© 2000 Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized
distribution.