Comparing mand training and other instructional methods to teach a foreign language

Wu and team taught Chinese words to four college students who spoke only English. They tried four ways: mand training (ask and receive), tact training (name pictures), and two kinds of intraverbal drills (translate back and forth).

Each adult got one method at a time while the researchers counted how fast the new words were learned and how many extra words popped up without teaching.

Mand training won. Three out of four adults learned Chinese words faster and started using extra words on their own. The fourth adult did about the same across all methods.

Tact and intraverbal training worked, but the gains were slower and fewer surprise words showed up.

The result lines up with Valentino et al. (2019). Their big review of 45 mand studies says the field often skips EO checks; Wu’s team kept the EO strong by letting learners get the item right after asking.

It also echoes Jennings et al. (2017). They showed that tact plus intraverbal training can build equivalence classes without extra matching trials. Wu adds that, for speed, you should still start with mands.

Mitteer et al. (2020) found tact tweaks like background pictures barely change acquisition. Wu goes a step further: switching from tact to mand gives a real boost, not just a tweak.

If you run foreign-language lessons, sign-language drills, or any new-vocabulary program, start with mands. Let the learner ask and immediately get the item. You will save teaching time and get free generalization. Drop the extra flash-card rounds until after the mands are solid.