A systematic review of empirical intraverbal research: 2015–2020
Intraverbal research is booming—Jennins et al. (2022) confirm prerequisite checks still rule, but newer trials show you can teach faster with target-level mastery and non-overlapping sets.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Jennings and the team read every intraverbal paper published from 2015 through 2020. They sorted the studies by the skills each team checked before teaching intraverbals.
What they found
The pile of intraverbal studies keeps growing. Most teams still test echoics, tacts, and listener skills first. The review shows this trend but gives no win-loss score.
How this fits with other research
Zhi et al. (2023) let kids pick tact or intraverbal drills. Both paths worked, so the old rule "tacts before intraverbals" may be softer than we thought.
Cordeiro et al. (2022) found that moving from set mastery to target mastery can cut intraverbal teaching time in half. The review notes the shift, yet many studies still use the slower set rule.
Halbur et al. (2024) warn that shared words across stimulus sets slow learning. The review lists the study, but most prior papers used overlapping sets anyway.
Why it matters
Use the review as a quick map before you plan intraverbal lessons. Check if the learner already has echoics, tacts, and listener skills. Then borrow the speed hacks from the newer single-case studies: try target-level mastery, keep stimulus sets separate, and let the child choose the format. These tweaks can save sessions while the core prerequisite check keeps its place.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Flip one intraverbal program from set mastery to target mastery and track sessions to criterion.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
AbstractThe impact of Verbal Behavior (Skinner, 1957) on behavior analytic research, although not immediate, has steadily increased. Empirical investigations of verbal operants initially focused on mands and tacts, yet other operants such as intraverbals, echoics, and autoclitics have started to receive more attention. Aguirre et al. (2016) reviewed intraverbal research between 2005 and 2015. The results showed an increase in intraverbal research, with studies mostly focused on direct intraverbal training and emergent behavior. The authors noted the substantial increase in intraverbal studies assessing emergence, suggesting a subsequent brief review would be beneficial. The purpose of the current review was to replicate and extend Aguirre et al. In addition to analyzing publication trends and research emphasis, we also identified and quantified the skill sets of participants, the method and components of training, and additional procedural details. The findings show a continued increase in intraverbal research, with empirical evidence supporting prerequisite skills.
Behavioral Interventions, 2022 · doi:10.1002/bin.1815