Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T23:24:27.635Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Comparison of Learning by Mentally Retarded Adolescents under Direct and Vicarious Conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2016

Stan A. Halpin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Specialised methods that are geared toward individualized programs may prove ineffectual with the moderately retarded child when instruction is provided in a small group setting. The demands of attending behaviour and observing behaviour may conflict. The effects of vicarious learning may depend upon active verbalization by observers (Cullinan, 1976) the provision of verbal rules, task complexity and the gender of the observer and model (Litrownik, Franzini and Turner, 1976), the combination of modelling and verbal cues Yoder and Forehand, 1974) and the utilization of self-reinforcement and self-instruction techniques (Guralnick, 1976). Others have studied the effects of reinforcement given to one subject while a second observes (Bandura and Walters, 1963; Barnwell and Sechrest, 1965). Studies have examined the effects of vicarious reinforcement upon behavioural problems in educational settings (Becker, Engelmann and Thomas, 1971; Broden, Bruce, Mitchell, Canter and Hall, 1970; Meacham and Weisen, 1969) and upon work performance in a sheltered workshop setting (Kazdin, 1973).

Type
Research Article
Information
Australasian Journal of Special Education , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , May 1978 , pp. 10 - 16
Copyright
Copyright © The Australian Association of Special Education 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. Social learning and personality development. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1963.Google Scholar
Barnwell, A., & Sechrest, L. Vicarious reinforce-ment in children at two age levels. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1965,56, 100–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, W. C, Englemann, S., & Thomas, D. R. Teaching: A basic course in applied psychology. Chicago: Science Research Associates, 1971.Google Scholar
Broden, M., Bruce, C, Mitchell, M., Carter, V., & Hall, R. V. Effects of teacher attention on attending behaviour of two boys at adjacent desks. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 1970,3, 199–203.Google Scholar
Bruning, J. L., and Kintz, B. L. Computational handbook of statistics. Glenview, Illinois: Scott Foresman, 1968.Google Scholar
Cullinan, D. Verbalization in EMR children's observational learning. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1976, 81, 1,65–72.Google Scholar
Denny, M. R. Research in learning and performance. In H. A., Stevens and R., Heber (Eds.) Mental retardation: A review of research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964.Google Scholar
Gardner, W. I. and Brandl, C. Reinforcement conditions and incidental learning in mentally retarded adolescents. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1967, 72, 215–219.Google Scholar
Gellerman, L. W. Chance orders of alternating stimuli in visual discrimination experiments. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1933, 42, 206–208.Google Scholar
Guralnick, M. J. Solving complex perceptual discrimination problems: techniques for the development of problem-solving strategies. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1976, 81,9, 18–25.Google ScholarPubMed
Kanfer, F. H. Vicarious human reinforcements: A glimpse into the black box. In L., Krasner and L. P., Ullman, Research in behaviour modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965.Google Scholar
Kazdin, A. The effect of vicarious reinforcement on performance in a rehabilitation setting. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded. 1973,8,1,4–11.Google Scholar
Kounin, J. S. and Gump, P. V. The ripple effect in discipline, Elementary School Journal. 1958, 59, 158–162.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. J. and Duncan, C. P., Vicarious experience and partial reinforcement. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1958, 57, 321-26.Google Scholar
Litrownik, A. J., Franzini, L. R., and Turner, G. L. Acquisition of concepts by TMR children as a function of type of modelling, rule verbalization, and observer gender. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1976, 80, 6, 620–628.Google Scholar
Marston, A. R. Determinants of the effects of vicarious reinforcement. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1966, 71, 550–558.Google Scholar
Meacham, M., & Weisen, A. Changing classroom behaviour: A manual for precision teaching. Scran ton, PA: International Textbook, 1969.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, and Bruning, J. L., Direct and vicarious experience of variations in percentage of reinforcement. Child Development, 1966, 37.Google Scholar
Siegel, S., Nonparametric statistics for the behavioural sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.Google Scholar
Travers, R. M. W., Reinforcement in classroom learning. In US Co-operative Research Project No. 1196, Parts II-III. Salt Lake City: University of Utah, 1964.Google Scholar
Travers, R. M. W., and Van Wagenen, K. N., Haywood, D. H., and McCormick, M. Learning as a consequence of the learner's task involvement under different conditions of feedback. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1964, 55, 3, 167–173.Google Scholar
Underwood, B. J. Experimental Psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966.Google Scholar
Yoder, P., and Forehand, R. Effects of modelling and verbal cues upon concept acquisition of non-retarded and retarded children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1974, 78, 5, 566–570.Google Scholar
Zeaman, D. and House, B. J. The role of attention in retardate discrimination learning. In Ellis, N. R. (Ed.) Handbook of mental deficiency. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1968.Google Scholar