VB-MAPP Presentation 2009-02-07

The Verbal Behavior Milestones Assessment and

Placement Program(VB-MAPP)

Parents Of Autistic Children of Northern Virginia (POAC-NoVA)

Melissa Modarressi, M.Ed.Theodore A. Hoch, Ed.D., B.C.B.A.

With tremendous thanks toDr. Mark Sundberg!

for writing the vast (really – vast!)

majority of what you’ll see and hear

today!

Overview of Today’s SessionIntroductionsBrief HistoryCurrent State of VB Assessment and InstructionThe VB-MAPP – Where it came fromThe VB-MAPP – How to do itThe VB-MAPP – How to figure out what to doThe VB-MAPP – How to evaluateConclusions

Introductions

MelissaTedDisclaimerwww.avbpress.com www.marksundberg.com

Brief HistoryThrough the millenia …Sechenov, Pavlov, Watson, and othersBlack box psychologistsSkinner, and the influence of consequencesApplication to thinking, reading, writing, speaking, etc.WW-IIVerbal BehaviorApplications to people with psychiatric or developmental disabilitiesContinued conceptual and experimental workApplication to people with autism

Controversies and Disagreements

General misunderstanding of ABA, and its range of applicationsFacilitated communicationSelection-based v. Topography-based systemsEducational personnel preparationHome v. school programmingITT v. NET “But if I teach him to sign, he won’t learn to speak”Form versus function

Current State of VB Assessment

Traditional assessment by an SLPStandardized tests (e.g., PPVT, EVT, Brigance, Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, etc.)Behavioral Language AssessmentABLLS-RVB-MAPP

Functional Nomenclature

MandTactEchoicTranscriptiveIntraverbalSpeaker’s repertoireListener’s repertoireAutoclitic

Motor imitation Vocal

Imitation Textual LRFFC Matching to

sampleVerbal

behavior

What is it?

AntecedentFire in the

fireplace

“Ready, aim”

Fire on the stove while you’re cooking

Your behavior

“Fire”

“Fire”

“Fire”

Consequence“Yep”

???

Someone rushes in to help

What is it?

AntecedentFIRE written on

board

Smell of smoke

I say “fire”

It’s hot, orange, and burns

Your behavior

“Fire”

“Fire”

“Fire”

“Fire”

Consequence????

???

“yep”

“That’s the word”

So, verbal behavior’s not about teaching words?

Not so much …

Back to that VB-MAPP –Where did it come from?

History described earlierEvolution helped along by numerous behavior analysts (and even SLPs)Field tested on NT kids and kids with autism and other disabilitiesNormed against other instruments

How does VB-MAPP compare with other

assessments?FunctionalFormative and summativeCriterion and norm referencedAssesses verbal repertoiresThose way cool Barriers and Transitions Assessments, and that IEP Guide

VB-MAPP – Who can administer it?

VB-MAPP –Who should administer it?

“In order to conduct this language assessment it is essential that the the tester have a basic understanding of behavior analysis, Skinner’s (1957) analysis of verbal behavior, and the components of linguistic structure”

Sundberg (2008), p. 16

VB-MAPP – Section by Section

VB-MAPP Skills AssessmentSkills assessed on the VB-MAPP include:

Elementary verbal operants Listener skillsVocal outputIndependent play Social skills and social playVisual perceptual skills and matching-to-sampleGrammatical and syntactical skillsGroup and classroom skillsBeginning academic skills

VB-MAPP Skills AssessmentMilestones in three developmental levels

Level 1: 0-18 months Level 2: 18-30 months Level 3: 30-48 months

Scores balanced across each level

Five items and five possible points for each skill area

Three boxes in all sections for separate administrations

Each item scored 0, 1, or ½

Look for the operant level; If the skill is below operant level score quickly and move on; if it is close to the operant level, test it

VB-MAPP Level 1: Tact

VB-MAPP Skills Assessment

Total for the five items is marked on the top of each skill area

Totals for each skill area are added for all three levels and placed on the VB-MAPP Scoring Form

Total score on the Echoic sub-test is converted to a milestone score on the VB-MAPP form

Specific items on the VB-MAPP have been adjusted many times based on the field-test data (See VB-MAPP Assessment Forms)

VB-MAPP Barriers AssessmentImportant to find out what a child can do (The VB-MAPP Skills Assessment), but also what she can’t, and why

VB-MAPP Barriers Assessment designed to identify and score 22 different learning and language acquisition barriers

Once a barrier is identified, a more detailed descriptive and/or functional analysis is required

Many ways for a verbal repertoire or related skill to become defective so individualized analysis needed to determine what the nature of the problem is for a specific child, and what intervention program might be appropriate

VB-MAPP Barriers AssessmentDefective Verbal Behavior

Descriptive functional analysis of verbal behavior

Behavioral analysis of words, phrases, and sentences emitted by children with autism

Same basic principles of behavior as nonverbal behavior

What is the source of control?

Sources of control often reveal that what appears to be a correct response in form is actually incorrect in function

VB-MAPP Barriers Assessment

Defective Verbal Behavior

Might not be the same source of control observed in a typically developing child (e.g., I have a red shirt on)

Each verbal operant can be susceptible to unwanted sources of control

Defective mands (I want candy. What’s that?)

Defective tacts (Bounce ball, Black car, Under table)

VB-MAPP Barriers AssessmentCommon Learning and Language Acquisition

Barriers

Instructional control (Escape/avoidance)

Behavior problems

Defective mand

Defective tact

Defective motor imitation

Defective echoic (e.g., echolalia)

Defective matching-to-sample


Barriers

Defective listener repertoires (e.g., LD, LRFFC)

Defective intraverbal

Defective play and social skills

Prompt dependent, long latencies

Scrolling responses

Defective scanning skills

Failure to make conditional discriminations

Failure to generalize


Barriers

Weak or atypical MOs

Response requirements weakens the MO

Self-stimulation

Articulation problems

Obsessive-compulsive behavior

Reinforcement dependent

Does not attend to people/materials

Defective social behavior

Scoring the VB-MAPP Barriers Assessment

Rate the child on the VB-MAPP Barriers Assessment Form using a Likert-type scale of 1 to 5

1 or 2 = no significant barriers, and formal intervention plan may not be required.

3, 4, or 5 = barrier(s) present, that probably should be addressed as part of the intervention program

For some, immediate focus of intervention is on removing a particular barrier, rather than language instruction

Most common immediate barriers to remove involve instructional control problems, or other behavior problems

VB-MAPPS for Typically Developing Children

Lisa HaleMark L. Sundberg

Rikki RodenCarl T. Sundberg

Cindy A. Sundberg

VB-MAPPs for Children with Autism

Mark L. SundbergCarl T. Sundberg

Shannon RosenhanShannon MontanoKaisa Weathers

VB MAPP Skills Task AnalysisMilestones can be considered floors in a building, and the task analysis contains the steps between each floor

170 milestones and approximately 1000 total tasks in the VB-MAPP task analysis

Task analysis form also allows for more detailed skills tracking

Building a whole repertoire, not just individual skills (e.g., mand, tact, M-T-S repertoires)

VB MAPP IEP Goals and Placement

Results of the VB-MAPP Skills and Barriers Assessment provide guidance for developing an intervention program

Specific IEP goals are provided for each milestone and barrier

The assessment corresponds with the verbal behavior intervention program (Sundberg & Partington, 1998; Sundberg, in preparation)

VB-MAPP Transition Assessment

A common goal for many educators and parents of children is to integrate the child into a mainstream setting

Many different levels of integration

Transition Assessment designed to identify skills that increase probability a child will succeed in a less restrictive setting

No single skill will be a good determiner of success, but a collective body of skills can help educators and parents make decisions

VB-MAPP Transition Assessment helps determine if a child has necessary prerequisite skills to learn in a less restrictive classroom environment

There are 18 skill areas on the Transition Assessment



Transition skills include: Overall VB-MAPP Skills score Barrier behaviors Group skills Social skills Independence Classroom routines Play skills Toileting

Spontaneity Reinforcers Learning in the natural environment Generalization Quick acquisition Retention Transfer skills Self-care Safety

VB-MAPP Barriers Assessment Analysis of a Defective Mand Repertoire

Many children with autism have absent, weak, or defective mand repertoireextensive tact and listener skills, as well as other elevated scores on the VB-MAPP Skills assessment

Not uncommon for child to engage in tantrum or some other problem behavior as a mand

Word learned under SD control may not automatically transfer to MO control

Analysis of a Defective Mand Repertoire

Distinction between SD and MO control not part of many language assessment and intervention programs designed for children with autism

Many potential causes of defective manding so functional analysis needed to determine cause for an individual child


The VB-MAPP Barriers AssessmentPotential causes of absent, weak,

or defective mand repertoire

Mand training not part of child’s early language training history

Target response form too difficult for the child

When a child has no or limited vocal behavior, sign language or PECS has not been tried

High response requirement weakens the relevant MO

No current MO in effect for targeted item

Potential causes of absent, weak, or defective mand repertoire

Response is prompt bound by physical, echoic, imitative, or verbal stimuli

A nonverbal stimulus acquires control of the response and blocks MO control

A verbal stimulus acquires control of the response and blocks MO control

Motivation (MO) does not control the response form

The VB-MAPP Barriers Assessment



Single response topography functions as the mand (e.g., more, please, that)

Can’t establish differential response topographies

Scrolling gets reinforced

Not enough mand trials are provided each day

Poor audience control


Mands only required and reinforced in specific setting

Generalization training is not provided

Verbal information does not function as reinforcement for the child

Manding does not come under control of natural contingencies

History of punishment for attempts at manding


The VB-MAPP Barriers AssessmentAnalysis of a Defective Tact Repertoire

Tact less susceptible to becoming defective than mand or intraverbal, due in part, to nature of tact’s controlling variables

Nonverbal stimulus control more measurable and accessible, in general, much clearer than motivational control (mand), and verbal stimulus control (intraverbal)

Often the case that the wrong nonverbal stimulus acquires control of a tact

For example, when teaching tacts related to verbs, the goal is that the specific moving nonverbal stimulus evokes a specific response, not the object related to the movement

Analysis of a Defective Tact Repertoire

Some children learn to emit a word that is a verb in form but not in function, as in the response Drinking juice when just shown a cup, or Throwing ball when shown a ball

Similar problems can be observed in efforts to teach tacts related to prepositions and adjectives (e.g., Above and Below. Big and little)

Gone unchecked, these tacting errors can be difficult to change and can become the source of other verbal problems later in training, such as intraverbal rote responding


The VB-MAPP Barriers AssessmentCommon causes of absent, weak, or defective

tact

Limited amount of formal tact training has occurred

Other barriers such as instructional control dominate the educational activities

Articulation is unintelligible, and augmentative communication has not been tried

Tacting is prompt bound by echoic, imitative, or other SDs (e.g., lip prompts)

Common causes of absent, weak, or defective tactScrolling through targeted tacts gets reinforced

Single response tacts have been over conditioned

Limited training with multiple SDs and multiple response tacting

The wrong source of control is established (e.g., tacting verbs or emotions from pictures)



Common causes of an absent, weak, or defective tact

Failure to analyze complexities of tacts involving prepositions, pronouns, adjectives, private events, social behavior, etc.

Verbal stimuli do not establish a feature of nonverbal stimuli as an SD (IV/Tact combo)

Poorly sequenced curriculum

Generalization training is not provided (stimulus and response classes)

Common causes of an absent, weak, or defective tact

No spontaneous tacting due to additional prompts in training (SD effect)

No spontaneous tacting due to aversive variables present in training (MO-Reflexive)

Tacting not reinforced by natural or automatic contingencies

The child has a punishment history for tacting

Excessive or inappropriate tacting gets reinforced


VB-MAPP Barriers AssessmentAn Analysis of a Defective Intraverbal Repertoire

• Intraverbal behavior is most prone to becoming rote

Task of directly teaching intraverbal behavior is complicated and endless

• Early intraverbal training pretty straight forward, but by 3-4 years of age, a typical child acquires 1000s of different intraverbal relations

• Most adults have hundreds of thousands of different intraverbal relations as a part of their verbal repertoires

An Analysis of a Defective Intraverbal Repertoire

Contact with these verbal stimuli can evoke numerous intraverbal response

Number of different intraverbal relations far outnumbers the number of different mands and tacts. The frequency of mands may be greater than intraverbals, but often the mands are related to a relatively small set of MOs


VB-MAPP Barriers AssessmentAn Analysis of a Defective Intraverbal Repertoire

Many children with autism have great difficulty acquiring meaningful intraverbal behavior. Some have acquired 100s of tacts and LDs, but no more than a few simple intraverbal relations

Tacting, imitation, echoic, matching, LDs, textual, and transcriptive have degree of sameness that may come easier for children with autism than intraverbal behavior

Not only are antecedents for these repertoires more consistent and clearer, but also response is frequently the same (A spoon is usually Spoon, 2 is always Two)


Intraverbal relations involve constantly changing SDs and responses

For example, a tree is always a tree for echoic, tacting, matching, etc., but discussion about trees can be comprised of hundreds, if not thousands, of different intraverbal relations

Furthermore, discussion about trees won’t occur exactly the same way each time

However, this type of defective intraverbal behavior not uncommon for some high functioning individuals with autism, and especially those with Aspergers




Verbal SDs usually much more complicated than the nonverbal SDs; have multiple components, in brief time frame

Multiple words as SDs almost always involves verbal conditional discriminations

Vocal verbal stimuli are transitory, nonverbal stimuli more static

Attending to verbal SDs often more laborious than to nonverbal SDs


Visual stimuli may block the establishment of control by verbal stimuli

Many words that are not clearly evoked by a corresponding nonverbal stimulus (e.g., the, a, can’t, usually, if, its, for, of, anyway, whatever) but form the VCDs

is often shaped to include only the salient information

IV responses typically more complex than tact responses



The MLU of a tact tends to be much shorter than the MLU for an intraverbal

There is often only so much that can be said about a specific nonverbal stimulus (e.g., the tact bike vs, IV story about a bike)

The tact response is often shaped to include only the salient information


VB-MAPP Barriers AssessmentCommon causes of an absent, weak,

or defective intraverbal repertoire

Child has not received formal intraverbal training

Child is given training, but it’s to early to focus on intraverbals

Child’s echoic repertoire is too strong (echolalia)

Nonverbal stimuli control response form (tact prompt bound)

MOs control response forms (strong IVs on favorite topics)

Common causes of an absent, weak, or defective intraverbal repertoire

Intraverbal curriculum is out of developmental and behavioral sequence

Rote intraverbal responses have been firmly established due to conditioning history

Out of context or irrelevant intraverbal training may establish odd forms of IV behavior

Single verbal stimuli and single verbal responses have been over conditioned


VB-MAPP Barriers AssessmentCommon causes of an absent, weak,

or defective intraverbal repertoire

Specific target responses are not in child’s repertoire as tacts, LDs, or LRFFCs

Child doesn’t attend to multiple verbal stimuli (S-deltas)

Child does not have sufficient training on verbal conditional discriminations

Verbal stimulus classes have not been established

Common causes of an absent, weak, or defective intraverbal repertoire

Verbal response classes have not been established

Poor audience control

No automatic reinforcement for IV behavior

A punishment history for intraverbal behavior

An extinction history for intraverbal behavior



An Analysis of a Defective Listener Repertoire

Listener’s behavior involves several independent repertoires

Listener as audience for others’ verbal behavior

Listener’s nonverbal behavior evoked by others’ words

Listener’s covert verbal behavior evoked by others’ words (this part is actually speaker behavior, but commonly and erroneously referred to as listener, or receptive, behavior.


Common Causes of an Absent, Weak, or Defective Listener Repertoire

Others’ speech doesn’t function as conditioned reinforcer

Others’ speech doesn’t function as an SD for attending

Child doesn’t reinforce others’ VB

Child doesn’t mediate reinforcement for others’ VB


Child has not become an SD for certain verbal behavior from others

Child has not received formal listener training

Scrolling get reinforced in listener training

Inadvertent prompts control correct responses (eye gazes, position, hand placement)




Child has a weak conditional discrimination repertoire

Verbal stimuli does not evoke scanning (or attending to the array

Child has been over conditioned with limited array

Child has been over conditioned with single stimulus and single response


Generalization training has not provided (stimulus and response classes

Child stims with the materials

No LRFFC training has been provided

The curriculum is poorly sequenced


VB-MAPP Barriers AssessmentCommon causes of absent, weak, or defective

visual perception and matching to sample repertoire

Child may have some type of vision impairment

Child has not received formal training on visual discrimination tasks

Adults have poor instructional control

Child stims with materials

Targeted visual tasks are out of developmental sequence (curriculum)

Common causes of absent, weak, or defective visual perception and matching to sample

repertoire

Child is prompt bound by position, body movement, eye or pointing prompts, etc.

There is a reinforcement history for position preference, or specific response patterns

Scrolling behavior gets reinforced

A verbal consequence like No is really an SD to pick another item



visual perception and matching-to-sample repertoire

If no reinforcement is provided for first selection, the child quickly selects another item

There is a failure to scan visual arrays and comparisons efficiently

There is a failure to make conditional discriminations

Over conditioning with a small array (limited array variation)

Common causes of absent, weak, or defective visual perception and matching-to-sample

repertoire

Task is too easy because the comparison stimuli are very different from each other

Limited training with large arrays, scenes, and arrays in the natural environment

Limited training with similar stimuli in the array

Limited training with large arrays and similar stimuli in scenes and in the natural environment



Common causes of absent, weak, or defective echoic

Physiological variables (e.g., weak muscle control, severe illnesses, cerebral palsy)

Little or no training or encouragement of echoic responding has been provided

Weak automatic reinforcement for echoic and vocal behavior

Possible automatic punishment (or other forms of punishment) for vocal behavior

Common causes of absent, weak, or defective echoic

Child demonstrates low rate babbling or vocal play

Adults have poor instructional control

Vocal self-stimulation interferes with echoic development

Child has weak MOs for social interaction with other people

Child doesn’t attend to vocal stimuli



echoic

Targeted vocal sounds, blends, and words are out of developmental sequence

Child has an aversive (failure) history regarding attempts to teach echoic behavior

Generalization training has not been provided

Repertoire too strong (echolalia, prompt bound)

Automatic reinforcement for out-of-context verbal responses (“Delayed echolalia”)

VB-MAPP Barriers AssessmentPotential causes of scrolling

Responses that are first trained are not completely acquired (weak SD control)

Failure to identify that scrolling is occurring

The response is actually under a specific type of prompt rather than the target SD

The amount of discrimination training is insufficient

Potential causes of scrolling

New words/signs are added too quickly

Scrolling gets intermittently reinforced

New stimuli and new responses are too similar

For mands, new MOs and specific reinforcement are similar to the earlier ones


Potential causes of scrolling

Maintenance and generalization trials are insufficient

Failure to reinforce first wrong response evokes the next response

Curriculum is out of sequence

Scrolling is less work than discriminating


VB-MAPP Barriers AssessmentInstructional control/non-compliance

(escape and avoidance)Many children with autism have learned ways to avoid or terminate demands placed upon them.These behaviors range from mild (e.g., looking away or not responding) to severe (e.g., aggression and self-injury). Behavior’s function is often to escape from things they don’t want to do (e.g., hair brushing, car seats, instructional demands), or stimuli indicating unwanted activities are coming (avoidance) (e.g., bedtime, turning off the TV, table tasks)These behaviors are common in typically developing children, but can become quite severe for a child with autism

Instructional control/non-compliance (escape and avoidance)

There are a number of potential causes for instructional control problems. It is the job of the behavior analyst conduct a descriptive and/or functional analysis to determine the specific cause for each individual child



Potential causes of noncompliant behaviors

Avoidance or escape of the demand is (negatively) reinforced (not followed through)

The child has a long history of successful avoidance and escape behavior

Extinction bursts are reinforced

Intermittent reinforcement develops persistence


Positive reinforcement also follows the negative behaviors

Not enough reinforcement is provided for compliance

Effective reinforcers are not identified, or they cannot compete with negative reinforcement

Demand is too high (e.g., task expectations and curriculum issues)



Demands are unclear or vague

Demand requires that child give up powerful reinforcers

Demands are in the form of threats (coercive)

Steps to successful compliance are too large

Intervention program is inconsistent


Thank You!

For more information on verbal behavior and links to other

material go to:

www.marksundberg.com

VB-MAPP Presentation 2009-02-07

Documents

Transcript of VB-MAPP Presentation 2009-02-07