Alyssa McElroy

• Hometown: Broadview Heights, Ohio
• Practicum Sites:
• WoodsEdge Learning Center
• Great Lakes Center for Autism Treatment and Research
• System: Project Performance Management System
• Future Plans: Clinician at Trumpet Behavioral Health in San Jose, California

​

Using a Pivotal Response Model to Increase Manding in a Child with Autism

Alyssa R. McElroy

BRSS Oral Defense

April 26^th, 2013

Autism

• Developmental disability that includes delays in:
• Social interactions
• Skill acquisition
• Communication

Child

• 3 years old
• Diagnosed with autism
• Robust skill acquisition
• Interacts with adults and peers
• Poor communication skills
• Defective requesting skills (manding)
• Difficult to understand

Manding

• A behavior analytic term for “requesting”
• i.e. deMAND, comMAND
• Can include many topographies
• Vocal
• Picture Exchange
• Signing

“Cupcake”

Manding

• Manding is controlled by
• A state of deprivation or aversive stimulation
• i.e. you haven’t had a drink of water in a while
• i.e. pain
• Usually specifies it’s reinforcer
• i.e. “can I have some water, please.”

For Example

Reinforcer

MO

Mand

Pivotal Response Model

• Pivotal Response Model:
• Use natural learning environment
• Create learning situations
• Results in improved social and communication skills

What is a Pivotal Response?

• Pivotal Response:
• Mastered behaviors that evoke positive changes
• Allow contact with other learning situations
• Examples:
• Motivation
• Self-management
• Self-initiations

​

​

Pivotal Response Training

• Over 14 years of evidence-based research
• Model developed by Drs. Robert and Lynn Koegel
• Comprehensive program
• Based on the principles of behavior

​

​

​

​

Teaching Manding - Procedure

• Daily seven-minute sessions
• Led by child in a preferred play area
• Access to preferred items (toys, activities) were dependent on a vocal mand
• Shaping was used to establish approximations
• Accepted approximations
• Slowly increased difficulty

​

Targeted Mands

• Grocery Cart (Cart)
• “ca”, “car”
• Puzzle
• “puh”, “puh-puh”

Pre-test/Baseline

• Seven-minute session
• Led by child in preferred play area
• Access to preferred items/activities blocked
• Asked “What do you want?”
• Scored 0%, no correct responses

​

​

Pre-test/Baseline

“What do you want?”

“DA!”

Mand Training

• Daily seven-minute sessions
• Led by child in preferred play area
• Access to preferred items/activities blocked
• Asked “What do you want?”
• Provided an immediate verbal prompt

​

Mand Training

“What do you want?”

“CART!, CART, CART”

“CA!”

Mand Training Cont.

• Correct Response (+)
• Child vocalizes or approximates name of item
• Within five seconds of the verbal prompt
• Approaches and interacts with requested item
• Incorrect Response (-)
• Child doesn’t vocalize or approximate name of item
• Within 5 seconds
• Doesn’t interact with requested item

Mand Shaping

• Once approximations occurred reliably
• 2 sessions at 90% or 3 sessions at 80%
• Increased difficulty of approximation
• i.e. (“puh” to “puh-puh”)

Pre & Post Test

Frequency of Manding Over Intervention

Discussion

• Procedure was effective
• Child learned targeted words
• Manding generalized to other tutors
• Observed non-targeted mands

​

​

Maintenance

• Procedure into daily schedule
• December 2012
• Faded prompts and question

Future Directions

• Recently diagnosed with Apraxia
• Oral/Motor speech disorder
• Difficult to understand
• Increase amount of vocal/verbal procedures
• Requiring vocal mands for items throughout day

Thank you

• For your time and attention ☺

​

• Comments and/or questions?