A comparison of teaching tacts with and without background stimuli on acquisition and generality
Background pictures neither help nor hurt tact acquisition, so spend your prep time planning generalization probes instead.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Mitteer et al. (2020) asked a simple question: Does adding background pictures speed up tact learning for kids with autism? They compared two ways to run discrete-trial tact sessions. One way showed the target item on a plain white card. The other way showed the same item sitting in a scene, like a cup on a kitchen table. The team used an alternating-treatments design so each child got both styles during the same day.
What they found
Kids learned the new tacts just as fast with or without the background scenes. The line graphs for the two conditions almost overlap. But there was a catch. When the researchers tested the kids in new rooms or with new pictures, correct answers jumped around. Some children needed extra teaching rounds before they could label the same item anywhere. Backgrounds did not hurt, yet they did not help either.
How this fits with other research
Bowen et al. (2012) saw the same null result in mand training. Adding the question "What do you want?" did not change how quickly children learned to ask. The pattern repeats: small verbal tweaks rarely speed acquisition.
Shillingsburg et al. (2009) and Lerman et al. (1995) warned that generality never comes free. Their studies showed kids can master yes/no or mands in one setting, then fail in the next without extra teaching. Mitteer’s data line up perfectly—background scenes alone do not produce generalization.
Baron et al. (1968) looked at matching-to-sample and found the opposite: requiring kids to look at the sample sped up learning. That contrast is useful. It tells us stimulus control matters, but the kind of background used in tact training is not the critical piece.
Why it matters
You can stop worrying about pretty backgrounds when you write tact programs. Pick the style that is easiest to print or that the child likes; learning rate will stay the same. Plan ahead for generalization instead. After the child labels the picture at the table, test the same label with real objects, in new rooms, and with new people. Add those extra probes early so you do not have to backtrack later.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Run your next tact trial on a plain card, then immediately test the same label with the real object in the play area.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
AbstractWe evaluated whether teaching tacts of images with or without backgrounds would affect acquisition during teaching and generality across untaught targets with four children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Including backgrounds could slow acquisition but bolster generality across other media containing backgrounds, whereas removing backgrounds may improve acquisition but result in poorer generality. Overall, acquisition rates were similar across conditions for three children, although one child displayed consistently slower acquisition during the background condition. We rarely observed generality to untaught targets when programming extinction, but embedding differential reinforcement or teaching additional images with backgrounds led to equally successful outcomes irrespective of initial teaching conditions. Teaching with or without backgrounds may result in marginal differences in acquisition of teaching and untaught targets, especially when arranging supplemental procedures during tests for generality. We discuss the importance of intrasubject replication, considerations when testing for generality, and implications for practice.
Behavioral Interventions, 2020 · doi:10.1002/bin.1702