Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Behavior Modification
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Linton, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Singh, N. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Linton, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Singh, N. N.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Acquisition of Sign Language Using Positive Practice over correction

Joy M. Linton

Nirbhay N. Singh

University of Canterbury, New Zealand

The effects of two training procedures for teaching sign language to four me-ntally retarded persons were evaluated. Positive practice overcorrection alone, in combination with positive reinforcement, and a no-training control condition were compared in an alternating treatments design. During baseline, each sub-ject was required to observe the trainer say and sign the target word and then to say and sign the same word upon request. During positive practice overcorre-ction, an error in sign production resulted in the subject having to repeat the correct response five times. For the combined procedure each correct response resulted in positive reinforcement. No assistance or feedback was provided in the no-training control condition. All subjects learned new signs under both training conditions, but the addition of positive reinforcement was superior to positive practice alone with three subjects. Both procedures were equally effect-ive with the fourth subject. No learning took place in the no-training control condition. Two subjects were able to vocalize all words correctly, no change in vocalization was observed in the third, and some improvement was noted in the fourth, particularly under the reinforcement condition.

Behavior Modification, Vol. 8, No. 4, 553-566 (1984)
DOI: 10.1177/01454455840084006


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JSLHRHome page
D. C. Millar, J. C. Light, and R. W. Schlosser
The impact of augmentative and alternative communication intervention on the speech production of individuals with developmental disabilities: a research review.
J Speech Lang Hear Res, April 1, 2006; 49(2): 248 - 264.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Behav ModifHome page
M. Lenz, N. N. Singh, and A. E. Hewett
Overcorrection as an Academic Remediation Procedure: A Review and Reappraisal
Behav Modif, January 1, 1991; 15(1): 64 - 73.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Behav ModifHome page
C. A. Stewart and N. N. Singh
Overcorrection of Spelling Defilcits in Moderately Mentally Retarded Children
Behav Modif, July 1, 1986; 10(3): 355 - 365.
[Abstract] [PDF]