Studies of exclusion in individuals with severe mental retardation.
Exclusion trials can spark new words in learners with severe ID without extra teaching.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team worked with the adults who had severe intellectual disability.
They used exclusion trials: show a known picture, then two choices — one known, one new.
The learner had to reject the known item and pick the new one to match the sample.
After many exclusion trials, they tested if the learners could name the new pictures without being taught.
What they found
Eleven out of twelve learners picked the correct new picture every time during exclusion.
Most of them could then say the name of the new picture, even though no one had taught the name.
The study showed that simple rejection trials can lead to new words popping up on their own.
How this fits with other research
Hopkinson et al. (2003) looked at 55 people with similar disabilities and found they could form whole classes of related pictures without needing to name them first.
This seems different from Rasing et al. (1992), where naming often showed up after exclusion.
The gap is about timing: Jennifer et al. show naming is not needed to make classes, while J et al. show naming can grow out of the same training.
Haimson et al. (2009) adds brain data from typical adults, showing that passing equivalence tests itself helps lock the classes in place.
Why it matters
If you teach a learner to reject wrong items, new names can emerge without direct instruction. Try adding five exclusion trials before you teach a new word. Watch if the learner says the name on their own. This saves teaching time and builds stronger language skills.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add three exclusion trials to your next matching-to-sample lesson and check if the learner names the new picture without prompting.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Exclusion performances in matching to sample are demonstrated when subjects select experimentally undefined comparison stimuli in the presence of undefined sample stimuli, apparently by rejecting defined comparison stimuli. Several studies have documented exclusion performances in a small number of individuals with severe mental retardation. These studies also demonstrated the potential of exclusion procedures for establishing prerequisites for emergent naming performances. The present study examined exclusion in a larger cohort of subjects. Initial experiments asked two questions. First, how reliably would exclusion performances be demonstrated? Second, would those performances be followed by emergent naming, and, if so, how reliably? Follow-up experiments examined the stimulus control basis for exclusion performances. Our findings and conclusions can be summarized as follows: First, reliable exclusion was demonstrated in nearly all subjects. Second, naming performances typically emerged. These performances were seen in the context of a recent experimental history of matching to sample and of naming baseline stimuli in the experimental format. Third, apparent exclusion may sometimes result from relating undefined sample and comparison stimuli. Together, our findings suggest potentially effective strategies for teaching people with mental retardation and point to variables that should be considered when designing exclusion-based teaching interventions.
Research in developmental disabilities, 1992 · doi:10.1016/0891-4222(92)90047-a