Download - Video modeling and matrix training to teach pretend play in …... · 2019-02-13 · Video Modeling and Matrix Training 5 Abstract The purpose of this study was to combine video modeling

Video Modeling and Matrix Training 1

Video Modeling and Matrix Training to Teach Pretend Play in

Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

A Thesis Presented

by

Lauren M. Dannenberg

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Science

In the field of

Applied Behavior Analysis

Northeastern University

Boston, Massachusetts

August 2010


NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY

Bouvé College of Health Sciences Graduate School

Thesis Title: A replication of Video Modeling and Matrix Training to teach pretend play in children with autism.

Author: Lauren M. Dannenberg

Masters of Science in Applied Behavior Analysis

Committee members:

_________________________________________________ ______________

Rebecca MacDonald Date

_________________________________________________ ______________

William Ahearn Date

_________________________________________________ ______________

Chata Dickson Date


Video Modeling and Matrix Training to Teach Pretend Play in

Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Lauren Dannenberg

Northeastern University

Submitted In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Science in Applied Behavior Analysis

in the Bouvé College of Health Sciences Graduate School

of Northeastern University, August 2010


Acknowledgements

Thanks and appreciation to Rebecca MacDonald, the research supervisor of this Master’s Thesis,

for her guidance and support throughout the data collection and writing of this Thesis. Special

thanks are also offered to Cara Grieco for her assistance with data collection and to Cormac

MacManus for his assistance throughout the process of this project.


Abstract

The purpose of this study was to combine video modeling with matrix training to teach play

skills in young children with autism. Three children with autism were taught scripted

vocalizations and actions for three play sets. Scripted play scenarios were developed using a 3 x

3 x 3 matrix involving characters, vehicles and objects. A within subject multiple probe design

across play sets was used to demonstrate experimental control with each participant.

Additionally, a multiple probe design across participants was used to demonstrate experimental

control across participants. Baseline data were collected for each participant with each play set.

During training the participant watched a video model consisting of an adult engaging in the

scripted scenario. After the participant watched the video twice they had five minutes to play

with the toys. Once mastery criteria were achieved, untrained stimuli were presented to the

participant to assess the emergence of recombinative play behaviors. Results showed that after

training on at least one of the play sets, 1 of the 3 participants demonstrated emergence of script

recombination. Recombination was performed by the second and third participant after a brief

recombination training session. The use of a matrix was a beneficial way to systematically teach

pretend play skills to the three participants of this study.


Table of Contents

A. Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………....5 B. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….7 C. Method

Participants……………………………………………………………………………....12 Setting……………………………………………………………………………….......13 Materials……………………………………………………………………………....…13 Independent Variable…………………………………………………………................15 Dependent Variable……………………………………………………………….....…..16 Experimental Design………………………………………………………………..…...18 Procedure……………………………………………………………...…………….......19 Interobserver Agreement………………………...………………………………………20

D. Results………………………………………………………………………….....……..23 E. Discussion……………………………………………………………………...………..46 F. References……………………………………………………….…………………...….48 G. Figure Captions……………………………………………………………………...…..57 H. Figures……………………………………………………………...……………...…….58 I. Appendices

Appendix 1: Bank play set and materials……………………………..…………………65 Appendix 2: Mansion play set and materials……………………………...……...……..66 Appendix 3: Castle play set and materials……………………………….…………...…67 Appendix 4: Bank script……………………………..……………………………...…..68 Appendix 5: Mansion script………………………………………………………...…..69 Appendix 6: Castle script………………………………………………………...……..70 Appendix 7: 3D matrices with trained scripts………………………..………...……….71 Appendix 8: 3D matrices with alternative probes…………………………………...….72 Appendix 9: Scoring guidelines for bank script………………………………...………73 Appendix 10: Scoring guidelines for mansion script………………………….………..74 Appendix 11: Scoring guidelines for castle script………………….……...……………75


Using Video Modeling with Matrix Training to Teach Pretend Play.

Autism is a developmental disability which significantly affects a child’s education (U.S.

Department of Education, 1999). This disability often presents with severe deficits in displaying

appropriate affect, which ultimately impedes social development (McGee, Feldman, & Chernin,

1991). Children with autism may engage in repetitive behaviors or resist changes in the

environment (Delano, 2007). Another deficit observed within this population is that they may be

less likely to accept or make social initiations (Koegal, Koegal, Frea, & Fredeen, 2001). As a

result of these deficits, children with autism are less likely to develop play skills at the same rate

as their typically developing peers.

In past studies researchers developed ways to teach different skills to children with

autism. An effective way to teach children with autism is modeling. Modeling has been shown

to be effective because it leads to skills being acquired and generalized quickly (Coleman &

Stedman, 1974). Learning through observation of peers has also been effective in teaching

various skills to children with autism (Garfinkle & Schwartz, 2002). Charlop-Christy, Le, and

Freeman (2000) found that video modeling was more effective than in-vivo modeling. Video

modeling interventions involve the learner watching a video of a typically developing peer or

adult modeling appropriate skills. Ideally after repeated exposures the learner demonstrates

imitation of those skills.

The use of a video modeling can be very effective because the same model can be used

multiple times. If a video is developed to teach one skill it can be used with different students to

teach the same skill. It has been found to be cost effective. Using video modeling can enhance

learning by showing edited video which highlights particular behaviors and can be repeatedly

viewed (Ayres & Langone, 2005).Videos that are developed to teach different skills may


produce a learning tool that is student specific by incorporating stimuli that are salient to that

student.

Reciprocating play actions and vocalizations are two marked deficits observed in children

with autism. Taylor, Levin, and Jasper (1999) focused on teaching commenting during play to

two children with autism via video modeling. A child with autism viewed a video with scripted

play statements made between his sibling and an adult. Treatment sessions involved a child

watching a video and then interacting with an adult. The children were taught to participate in an

interaction with an adult. The adult also provided reinforcement for correct scripted comments

made by the child. Results of this study showed that the children with autism were able to learn

three different scripted scenarios. During these scenarios only scripted comments were made by

the child. No novel unscripted comments were observed in this study.

Video modeling has been very successful in teaching both scripted play actions and

scripted play statements. Children with autism have also been taught to initiate play with peers

and adults through video modeling. MacDonald, Sacramone, Mansfield, Wiltz, and Ahearn

(2009) used video modeling to teach reciprocal play to children with autism. The purpose of this

study was to teach the children with autism to engage in longer sequences of reciprocal play with

their typically developing peers. The participants included two typically developing children and

two children with autism. Three different play sets were used to teach the children reciprocal

pretend play skills. During the study the researchers took data on scripted vocalizations and

actions as well as those that were unscripted. Results of this study showed that video modeling

was an effective tool to use to produce extended sequences of reciprocal play.


Video modeling studies have also been shown to be effective for teaching reciprocal play.

Reagon, Higbee, and Endicott (2006) taught pretend play skills to a student with autism using

video modeling with his sibling as a model and play partner. A 4-year-old boy diagnosed with

autism participated in the study. The boy was provided instruction on play in four play scenarios,

each was approximately 30 seconds long. Each episode of play consisted of 5 scripted

statements and 6 scripted actions. The participant’s sibling and two typically developing peers

were used as models for the scenarios. The video modeling phase of the study resulted in an

increase in play skills for the child with autism.

Generative play is an area of focus in many video modeling studies. Generative play can

be defined as play in which repertoires that have been taught in particular situations emerge in

novel untrained situations (Dauphin, Kinney, & Stromer, 2004). A review of the current video

modeling literature conducted by McCoy and Hermansen (2007) found that out of the three

studies about play skills, only 1 of the studies showed a development of novel play.

Roberts, MacDonald, and Ahearn (2007) examined the use of video modeling and

scripted substitutable loops to teach children to vary their play. Three children between the ages

of 5 and 6 years old participated. Participants were shown a video of scripted toy play with a

segment that was repeated using multiple characters. These scripted loops contained a series of

actions and vocalizations that were modeled with several characters in the play set, additional

characters were present but never trained. Following video modeling training, children used

characters that were both trained and untrained in their play. The short substitutable loops

resulted in greater variation in character use while longer loops resulted in play with trained

characters instead of untrained characters.


Another strategy used to develop generative play was included in a study conducted by

Paterson and Arco (2007). Four boys ranging in ages 6-9 were taught to interact with six sets of

toys. The toys were broken up into two different groups; related toys and unrelated toys. The

researchers found that appropriate play increased as a result of video modeling. Generalized

appropriate play was observed in one of the participants when he was presented with toys that

were related to each other. The authors used three sets of similar toys. The toys shared common

components; the different sets of toys may have been less discriminable which lead to the

generalized toy play that was observed.

Using a matrix has been an effective tool to produce untrained combinations. Goldstein

and Mousetis (1989) used matrix training and observational learning to teach 6 children with

developmental disabilities to combine known words into two- or three-word utterances. The

researchers used 3 x 5 x 6 object-preposition-location language matrix, which included three

known object words, two known and three unknown prepositions, and three known and three

unknown locations. The participants demonstrated generalization with novel combinations or

recombitative generalization of an unknown preposition or location with a known location or

object. Using a matrix provided a way to organize the material that the participant was being

taught and the recombinations that were possible.

Dauphin et al. (2004) examined the use of a video-enhanced activity schedule and matrix

training to teach sociodramatic play to a child with autism. During the first phase of the study

they used a computer based program was used to teach, various scripted actions and scripted

vocalizations. The modeled actions and figurines formed a 3 x 3 matrix. Within the matrix there

were three animals that performed three actions which formed nine combinations. The child was

taught three of the nine combinations possible. The participant was also taught three 3-item


schedules each contained one social activity, one closed activity, and one open activity.

Following the completion of training, the three schedules were intermixed which created three

novel schedules which the participant completed with 96% accuracy or better. In the final phase

of the study the researchers replicated the first phase of the study combined with an activity

schedule. They did this by using three novel matrices with three exemplars of each toy set. The

results showed that this type of teaching procedure was effective in teaching the participant to

use an activity schedule and to engage in sociodramatic play. Using video modeling training with

matrices resulted in an increase in novel play.

MacManus and MacDonald (2010) used video modeling combined with matrix training

to teach three children with autism spectrum disorder to engage in novel play. In this study a

3x3x3 tiered matrix was used to teach play. Each play set was similar, but included different

villains, heroes, vehicles, and objects. Each play scenario was made up of three scenes and all of

the participants received instruction for three play scripts. Playing according to the scripts was

trained to mastery criteria and subsequent alternative material probes were then conducted. In

these probes the participants were presented with different materials from the training materials,

these probes were conducted based on the matrix model used in the study. MacManus and

MacDonald found that once a participant had been trained on at least one of the play sets they

performed both recombined actions and vocalizations with a play set which had not been

previously trained. They demonstrated that using matrix training along with video modeling was

a more systematic approach to increasing novel play.

The purpose of the current study is to replicate the MacManus and MacDonald study by

examining the effects of combining matrix training with video modeling to increase pretend play,

including scripted actions and vocalizations as well as recombined actions and vocalizations.


Method

Participants

Three children diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder were selected for

participation in this study Bonnie, Vincent, and Peter. The participants were enrolled in an

intensive instruction preschool program. Bonnie was five years old at the beginning of the study

(Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test- Fourth Edition Form A (PPVT- 4A): age equivalent: 6 years

1 month, raw score: 99, 50th percentile). Bonnie communicated vocally to peers and adults using

phrases for the purposes of requesting desired items and activities. Vincent was a 4-year-old

male at the beginning of the study (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test- Fourth Edition Form A

(PPVT- 4A): age equivalent: 5 years 4 months, raw score: 86, 63th percentile). He

communicated primarily through 3-7 word phrases and sentences for the purposes of requesting

desired items and activities. Peter was a 4-year-old male at the beginning of the study (Peabody

Picture Vocabulary Test- Fourth Edition Form A (PPVT- 4A): age equivalent 5 years 2 months,

raw score: 92, 82nd percentile). Peter communicated primarily through 1-4 word phrases and

sentences primarily for the purpose of requesting desired items. All participants were selected

based on their prior experience with video modeling and their scores on the video modeling

assessment conducted at the participants’ school. This assessment tested areas which included;

motor imitation, actions with objects, picture to object matching, computer picture to object,

delayed computer picture to object, and video modeling. Their scores ranged from .75- 1.0.

Video modeling was also included in each participant’s Individualized Education Plan (IEP).


Setting

All sessions were conducted in a research room (2.7 m x 4.3 m) at the participants’

school. The room was separate from the participants’ classroom and free from distractions. The

room had a table and chair where the participant viewed the training videos. The play sets and

materials were placed on the floor adjacent to the participant. A DVD with training videos for

the scenario they were currently training on, DVD player and video camera which recorded all

sessions for later scoring.

Materials

The materials used were toys primarily from the Fisher Price Imaginext ® toy line for

ages 3-8. The three play set locations included a bank play set (46 x 7 x 30 cm) from Hasbro

Marvel Superhero Squad range of preschool toys, a mansion play set (26 x 21 x 32 cm) from

Kenner Batman Forever range of action figure toys, and a castle play set (53 x 30 x 42 cm) from

Fisher Price Magic Adventures range of preschool toys. Each play scenario had one of the play

set locations (bank, mansion, or castle), 2 characters, 1 object, and 1 vehicle. A Batcave play set

(55x 15 x 39 cm), “Batcomputer” play piece (11 x 2.5 x 10.5 cm) and “Bat-a-rang” weapon piece

(1 x 5 cm) were available in each of the three scenarios. The Batcave play set had 2 tiers with a

flat roof. It had 2 blue doors on the first tier that could be opened by turning red dials, a purple

spiral door that could be opened with a yellow switch from the outside of the play set or a red

dial on the inside, and elevator was located on the right side of the Batcave play set that could be

raised by turning a red dial next to the top of the elevator. All the characters were (6 x 7 cm) and

included hero characters and villain characters.


The bank play set had 2 tiers on the left hand side of the structure with a flat roof, and

one tier on the right hand side with a pointed roof. It had 2 doors that were able to be opened and

a vault door that could be opened by using a TNT button. The characters for this play set

included Joker and Batman. Additional objects included a money piece (5 x 2 cm) and a

Batmobile vehicle (14.5 x 9 x 7 cm) which had a roof that could be opened (see Appendix 1).

The mansion play set had 2 tiers, with 2 windows on the bottom floor, a balcony and a flat roof.

The characters for this play set included Penguin and Robin. Additional objects included a

diamond piece (4 x 40 cm, and a Batcycle vehicle (10.5 x 4 x 6cm) (see Appendix 2). The castle

play set had 2 windows on the side wall, a hidden room on the left hand side, and a flat spot

where characters could walk on the top of the castle. The characters for this play set included Mr.

Freeze and Superman. Additional objects included a ring piece (2 x 2 cm), and a Batcopter

vehicle (20 x 8 x 15 cm) which had a roof that was able to be opened and propellers that could be

turned (see Appendix 3).

Videos

Scripts were recorded on a camcorder and shown on a Portable DVD player with a 13 x

18 cm screen. The training video included one adult holding and speaking for each character.

The scripts included the characters manipulating the play materials, for example Mr. Freeze

putting the ring on his arm or Superman sitting in the Batcopter and flying it.

In the Bank scenario the Joker stole money from the bank. There was a call at the

Batcave that Batman answered and then he drove the Batmobile to the bank to stop the Joker.

This script contained 41 actions and 30 vocalizations and had a running time of 3 minutes and 14

s (see Appendix 4). The characters in this script included: 1 Batman figurine and 1 Joker


figurine. The scenario included the Fisher Price Batcave play set, Bank play set, Batmobile,

money bag piece, and Bat-a-rang piece.

In the mansion scenario the Penguin stole the diamond from the mansion. There was a

call at the Batcave that Robin answered and then he drove the Batcycle to the mansion to stop the

Penguin. This script contained 30 actions and 29 vocalizations and had a running time of 2

minutes and 52 seconds (see Appendix 5). The characters in this script included: 1 Robin

figurine and 1 Penguin figurine. The scenario included the Fisher Price Batcave play set,

mansion play set, Batcycle, diamond piece, and a Bat-a-rang piece.

In the castle scenario Mr. Freeze stole the ring from the castle. There was a call at the

Batcave that Superman answered and then he flew the Batcopter to the castle to stop Mr. Freeze.

This scenario contained 36 actions and 29 vocalizations and had a running time of 3 minutes and

21 seconds (see Appendix 6). The characters in this script included: 1 Superman figurine and 1

Mr. Freeze figurine. The scenario included the Fisher Price Batcave play set, Castle play set,

Batcopter, ring piece, and Bat-a-rang piece.

Independent Variable

The presentation of video models that showed the scripted play scenarios for each of the

play sets, and the three dimensional matrix the scripts and probes were arranged in were the

independent variables. Scripts were arranged in a three dimensional matrix based on Goldstein &

Mousetis (1989). The three 3 x 3 x 3 tiers in the matrix design describe each of the scenes in

each scripted scenario (see Appendix 7). The 3D matrices on the left indicate the 3 scenes for the

bank scenario and all of the combinations of the materials, the 3D matrices in the middle indicate

the 3 scenes for the mansion scenario and all of the combinations of the materials, and the 3D


matrices on the right indicate the 3 scenes for the castle scenario and the possible combinations.

The black shaded areas in the matrices indicate what was trained in each video model. For

example, in the first script, the participants use the Joker figurine to steal the money from the

bank on the first scene of the bank script. In the first script, second scene the matrix on the left in

the middle (see Appendix 7) the participants use the Batman figurine to drive the Batmobile to

the bank. In the third scene of the first script the participants use the Batman figurine to fight the

Joker figurine at the Bank play set, this is indicated by the black shaded in square (see Appendix

7). A matrix design identical to training was used during the alternative materials probe. During

these probes materials other than what was trained with the play set were included (see Appendix

8). For example in the first scene of the alternative bank materials probe, the first scene in the top

left corner, the participant is either given the Penguin figurine and the diamond or the Mr.

Freeze figurine and the ring. The participant uses the villain figurine to steal one of the objects.

Dependent Measures

All sessions were videotaped and data were collected on the occurrence of: (a) scripted

play actions, (b) scripted vocalizations, (c) unscripted vocalizations, (d) recombined actions, and

(e) recombined vocalizations. Data were collected during each 5-minute session on the number

of scripted vocalizations and scripted actions. Data were collected on unscripted vocalizations

during the Baseline, Probe, and Alternative Probe sessions. Data were collected on script

recombinations during the Alternative Probe sessions. Specific scoring guidelines were created

for each script. (see Appendices 9, 10, and 11).

Scripted Actions. Scripted actions were defined as any action that was identical or similar

to those modeled in the video, and resulted in the same change as seen in the model. For


example, the participant puts Batman in the Batmobile to drive to the bank. A nonexample was

the participant put the Joker in the Batmobile to drive to the bank.

Scripted Vocalizations. Scripted vocalizations were defined as vocal statements that

matched the statement of the video model. In addition, statements that were similar to the

modeled response but not identical were also scored. For example, when the participant said,

“Crime doesn’t pay Joker!” instead of “Remember Joker, crime doesn’t pay!” Statements that

included the incorrect naming of characters, objects, vehicles, or locations were not scored as

correct. For example, the participant referred to Batman as “Superman” when Superman was not

present.

Unscripted Vocalizations. Unscripted vocalizations were scored as a vocal statement that

did not meet the definition of the scripted statements in the video model, but that were

contextually appropriate to the scenario or characters (e.g., talking about characters, objects,

vehicles and/or locations, or talking for the characters). If the participant repeated the same

statement data was only taken first time that the statement was made. Repetitions Unscripted

vocalizations were scored by transcribing the unscripted vocalizations that each participant

emitted and the time that the participant emitted such vocalizations. Unscripted vocalization data

were taken during the Baseline sessions, Mastery Probe sessions, and Alternative Material Probe

sessions. This was to assess the changes in unscripted vocalizations as a result of video modeling

(MacDonald et al., 2009).

Recombination Actions: Script recombination actions were defined as actions in which

the participant substituted one character, object, or vehicle for another one. Script recombination

data were taken during the Alternative Materials Probes. For example a recombined action was


scored when the participant used the Joker to climb to the top of the Castle play-set instead of

Mr. Freeze which was unavailable during the Alternative Material Probe sessions or when the

participant used the Batcopter to fly to the bank when the Batmobile was unavailable during the

Alternative Material Probe sessions.

Recombinations Vocalizations: Script recombinations vocalizations were defined as

vocalizations in which the participant substituted one character’s scripted vocalization for

another character. A recombined vocalization for example, the participant used Batman to say, “I

arrived at the castle,” when the Bank play-set was unavailable during the Alternative Material

Probe sessions or when the participant uses the Joker to say, “I am going to steal the world’s

biggest diamond from the mansion,” when the money and the Bank play-set were unavailable

during the Alternative Material Probe sessions.

Experimental Design

A multiple probe design across play sets and a multiple probe design across participants

were used to evaluate the effect of training on the dependent measures. In the multiple probe

across participants design, the independent variable was applied to one of the participants while

baseline conditions remain in effect for the other participants. Once the first participant

performed at mastery criteria for each play scenario, the independent variable was applied to the

next participant.

In the multiple probe design intermittent measures are taken at the beginning of the study

for each participant and after each play set is mastered for each participant. The play sets were

taught in the same order for all participants starting with the bank, the mansion, and then the

castle. Participants were required to perform at or above mastery criteria for scripted


vocalizations and scripted actions before training could begin on the next play set. Baseline

sessions were conducted prior to the training for each play set and mastery probes were

conducted following the acquisition of each script.

Procedure

Play Script Baseline: Prior to all Baseline, Training, and Probe sessions play materials

were arranged in front of and to the side of the Batcave play set. During the baseline sessions the

participant began the session sitting or standing beside the play materials. The session began

when the experimenter gave the instruction, “It’s time to play,” and lasted approximately 5

minutes. All sessions were videotaped by the experimenter and later scored. During play script

baseline sessions only the materials necessary for the targeted script were available.

All Materials Baseline: During all materials baselines all play-sets and figurines were

present for the participant to engage with. The conditions and instruction given by the

experimenter were identical to the play script baseline sessions.

Training: During training sessions the experimenter started the video which was set up in

front of the participant on a table playing in the portable DVD player. The play script materials

were positioned adjacent to the participant. After viewing the model twice the participant was

instructed to play with the specific materials for the play scenario they were currently being

trained on the participants were trained on the video scripts indicated by the black shaded areas

in Appendix 7. During the first scene of the bank script the Joker stole the money from the bank,

in the second scene Batman drove the Batmobile to the bank, and in the third scene of the bank

script Batman stopped the Joker at the bank. The participant continued training until they scored

80% or better of the scripted actions and vocalizations for two consecutive sessions. Once


mastery criteria were achieved a probe was conducted. They then began training on the mansion

scenario as indicated by the black shaded area in Appendix 7 of the middle matrices, finally after

that script was mastered the participant began training on the castle scenario as indicated by the

black shading in the matrices in the right of Appendix 7.

Mastery Probe: Mastery probes were identical to play script baseline sessions.

Participants were told, “It’s time to play,” and given 5 minutes to engage with the play materials.

If the participant scored 80% or better of the scripted actions and vocalizations for one session

the play scenario was considered mastered. At this point an alternative materials probe was

conducted.

Alternative Materials Probes: Alternative materials probes were identical to baseline

sessions and mastery probes except the materials specific to the current script were removed and

the materials from one of the other scripts were made available. In Appendix 11, the dark grey

shaded areas indicate the recombinations that could emerge. After the participant met mastery

criteria with the bank scenario they were presented with alternative figurines, play objects, and

vehicles to the ones that had been previously trained with the bank scenario. For example during

the alternative materials probe after the bank the participant was presented with the Penguin,

diamond, Robin, and Batcycle instead of the Joker, money, Batman, and Batmobile.

Interobserver Agreement

Sessions were independently scored by a second observer for purposes of interobserver

agreement (IOA). The observer scored scripted vocalizations and actions during baseline,

training, and probe sessions. This observer also scored scripted vocalizations and actions as well

as recombined vocalizations and actions in the alternative materials probes. Unscripted


vocalizations were scored during baseline, mastery probe, and alternative material probe

sessions. Interobserver agreement was calculated for by dividing the number of trials with

agreement by the total number of sessions with agreement plus disagreement and multiplying by

100. IOA was scored for at least 33% of sessions for scripted and recombined vocalizations and

actions across all participants. IOA was scored for 31% of scored sessions for Participant 1, 38%

of scored sessions for Participant 2, and 36% of scored sessions for Participant 3.

Table 1 shows mean interobserver agreement for Participant 1. Participant 1’s mean IOA

score for scripted vocalizations in the bank script was 97.5% (range, 88%-100%). The mean IOA

for scripted actions for the bank script was 95.3% (range, 88%-100%). For the mansion script the

mean IOA for scripted vocalizations was 99% (range, 97%-100%). The mean IOA for scripted

actions was 95.3% (range, 93%-100%). For the castle script the mean IOA for scripted

vocalizations was 98% (range, 97%-100%). Mean IOA for the scripted actions for the castle

script was 96% (range, 91%-100%). For the alternative bank script IOA for recombined

vocalizations was 96% and 95.5% for recombined actions. For the alternative mansion script

mean IOA for recombined vocalizations was 98.2% (range, 96.3%-100%) and for recombined

actions mean IOA was 91.5% (range, 86%-97%). For the alternative castle script IOA for

recombined vocalizations was 98% and 80% for recombined actions. For unscripted

vocalizations the mean IOA was 93% (range, 80%-100%).

Table 2 shows mean interobserver agreement for Participant 2. Participant 2’s mean IOA

score for scripted vocalizations in the bank script was 97.4% (range, 93%-100%). The mean IOA

for scripted actions for the bank script was 96.2% (range, 93%-100%). For the mansion script the

mean IOA for scripted vocalizations was 99.3% (range, 97%-100%). The mean IOA for scripted

actions was 97.4 (range, 87%-100%). For the castle script the mean IOA for scripted


vocalizations was 99.3% (range, 97%-100%). Mean IOA for the scripted actions for the castle

script was 96.5% (range, 89%-100%). For the alternative bank script IOA for recombined

vocalizations was 100% and 95% for recombined actions. For the alternative mansion script

mean IOA for recombined vocalizations was 94% (range, 88%-100%) and for recombined

actions mean IOA was 86% (range, 83%-88%). For the alternative castle script IOA for

recombined vocalizations was 98% (range, 96%-100%) and 83% (range, 80%-85%) for

recombined actions. For unscripted vocalizations the mean IOA was 100%.

Table 3 shows mean interobserver agreement for Participant 3. Participant 3’s mean

IOA score for scripted vocalizations in the bank script was 95% (range, 90%-100%). The mean

IOA for scripted actions for the bank script was 93% (range, 80%-100%). For the mansion script

the mean IOA for scripted vocalizations was 96% (range, 83%-100%). The mean IOA for

scripted actions was 96% (range, 83%-100%). For the castle script the mean IOA for scripted

vocalizations was 99.6% (range, 97%-100%). Mean IOA for the scripted actions for the castle

script was 94% (range, 85%-100%). For the alternative bank script IOA for recombined

vocalizations was 94% (range, 92%-96%) and 91.5% (range, 91%-92%) for recombined actions.

For the alternative mansion script mean IOA for recombined vocalizations was 98% and for

recombined actions mean IOA was 93% (range, 91%-94%). For the alternative castle script IOA

for recombined vocalizations was 100% and 100% for recombined actions. For unscripted

vocalizations the mean IOA was 100%.


Results

Bonnie’s Baseline, Training, and Mastery Probes

Results for Bonnie are shown in Figure 1. Bonnie’s two initial baseline scores for the

bank were 0% for scripted vocalizations, 0% and 3% for scripted actions. Bonnie completed 0%

of the scripted vocalizations and 20% and 7% of the scripted actions of the mansion play script.

During the two initial castle baselines Bonnie completed 0% of the scripted vocalizations and 0%

and 17% of the scripted actions.

Bonnie began training on the bank play set and took 6 sessions to meet mastery criteria.

In session 9, Bonnie completed 93% of the scripted vocalizations and 90% of the scripted

actions. During the mansion and castle baselines following bank training, Bonnie completed 0%

of the scripted vocalizations and 20% of the scripted actions of the mansion script and 17% of

the scripted vocalizations and 33% of the scripted actions of the castle script.

Training began on the mansion play set in session 20. It took Bonnie 3 sessions to meet

mastery criteria. Bonnie completed 83% of the scripted vocalizations and 100% of the scripted

actions. Following mansion script training, Bonnie completed 24% of the scripted vocalizations

and 39% of the scripted actions of the castle script.

Training for the castle play set began in session 28 and took Bonnie 3 sessions to meet

mastery criteria. Bonnie completed 93% of the scripted vocalizations and 83% of the scripted

actions. In bank probe 2 Bonnie completed 90% of scripted vocalizations and 93% of scripted

actions. In mansion probe 2 Bonnie completed 76% of the scripted vocalizations and 73% of the

scripted actions.


Bonnie’s Alternative Material Probes

In the alternative bank material probes 1 and 2 (mansion and castle materials), sessions

10 and 11. Bonnie completed 13% of the recombined vocalizations and 24% of the recombined

actions of bank alternative materials probe 1(mansion materials). Bonnie completed 6% of the

recombined vocalizations and 29% of the recombined actions during the bank alternative

materials probe 2 (castle materials). During the bank alternative probe 3 (mansion materials),

session 36, Bonnie completed 67% of the recombined vocalizations and 92% of the recombined

actions. Bonnie completed 67% of the recombined vocalizations and 91% of the scripted actions

during the bank alternative probe 4 (castle materials), session 37.

During the alternative mansion material probes1 and 2 (bank materials and castle

materials). During the alternative mansion material probe 1(bank materials) session 24, Bonnie

completed 31% of the recombined vocalizations and 56% of the recombined actions. Bonnie

completed 31% of the recombined vocalizations and 69% of the recombined actions during the

mansion alternative materials probe 2(castle materials) session 25. During the mansion

alternative probe 3 (bank materials), session 39, Bonnie completed 6% of the recombined

vocalizations and 76% of the recombined actions. Bonnie completed 75% of the recombined

vocalizations and 83% of the recombined actions of the mansion alternative probe 4 (castle

materials), session 40.

During the castle alternative probe l (bank materials), session 32 Bonnie completed 88%

of the recombined vocalizations and 82% of the recombined actions. Bonnie completed 79% of

the recombined vocalizations and 90% of the recombined actions during the castle alternative

probe 2 (mansion materials), session 33.


Bonnie’s Recombined Vocalizations and Actions

Table 4 shows the percentage of actions and vocalizations recombined for each character,

object, vehicle, and play set for Bonnie. In alternative bank probes 1 and 3 (mansion materials)

sessions10 and 36, Bonnie recombined 55% of the actions completed by the villain after

mastering the bank script and 88% after mastering the castle script. She recombined 0% of the

actions using a hero character after mastering the bank script and 86% once the castle script was

mastered. Recombined vocalizations said by the villain were scored at 0% after the bank script

was mastered and 100% after the castle was mastered. Recombined vocalizations said by the

hero increased 20% after bank script mastery to 100% after castle script mastery. Recombined

vocalizations in which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or bank were mentioned increased from

an average of 24% after bank script mastery to 85% after castle script mastery.

In alternative bank probes 2 and 4 (castle materials) sessions 11 and 37, Bonnie

recombined 33% of the actions completed by the villain after mastering the bank script and 67%

of mastering the castle script. She recombined 27% of the actions using a hero character after

mastering the bank script and 79% once the castle script was mastered. Recombined

vocalizations said by the villain were scored at 0% after the bank script was mastered and 100%

after the castle was mastered. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero increased 0% after

bank script mastery to 60% after castle script mastery. Recombined vocalizations in which the

object, villain, hero, vehicle, or bank were mentioned increased from an average of 23% after

bank script mastery to 69% after castle script mastery.

In alternative mansion probes 1 and 3 (bank materials) sessions 24 and 39, Bonnie

recombined 67% of the actions completed by the villain after mastering the mansion script and


54% of mastering the castle script. She recombined 33% of the actions using a hero character

after mastering the mansion script and 67% once the castle script was mastered. Recombined

vocalizations said by the villain were scored at 25% after the mansion script was mastered and

25% after the castle was mastered. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero increased 27%

after mansion script mastery to 100% after castle script mastery. Recombined vocalizations in

which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or mansion were mentioned decreased from 36% after

mansion script mastery to 7% after castle script mastery. During the second alternative mansion

probe A the participant ran out of time to complete the session.

In alternative mansion probes 2 and 4 (castle materials) sessions 25 and 40, Bonnie


56% of mastering the castle script. She recombined 67% of the actions using a hero character

after mastering the mansion script and 87% once the castle script was mastered. Recombined

vocalizations said by the villain were scored at 89% after the mansion script was mastered and

100% after the castle was mastered. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero increased 45%


which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or mansion were mentioned increased from an average of

0% after mansion script mastery to 81% after castle script mastery.

Two alternative castle probes were administered after mastery of the castle script. In

alternative castle probe 1 (bank materials) session 32, Bonnie recombined 78% of the actions she

recombined 85% of the actions using a hero. Recombined vocalizations said by the villain were

scored at 100%. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero were scored at 100%. Recombined

vocalizations in which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or castle were mentioned were scored at

87%.


In alternative castle probe 2 (mansion materials) session 33, Bonnie recombined 82% of

the actions she recombined 85% of the actions using a hero. Recombined vocalizations said by

the villain were scored at 67%. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero were scored at 100%.

Recombined vocalizations in which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or castle were mentioned

were scored at 76%.

Bonnie’s Unscripted Vocalizations

Bonnie’s unscripted vocalizations are shown in Figure 2. Unscripted vocalization data

was taken in the initial baseline, baseline before training, mastery probe, and the alternative

materials probes for each play set. In the first bank baseline, the session before training, Bonnie

had 7 unscripted vocalizations scored. In the bank mastery probe, Bonnie had 0 vocalizations

scored. In the bank alternative probe 1 (mansion materials), Bonnie had 9 vocalizations scored.

In the bank alternative probe 2 (castle materials), Bonnie had 8 vocalizations scored. In Bonnie’s

second bank probe she had 5 unscripted vocalizations scored. In bank alternative probe 3

(mansion materials), Bonnie had 15 unscripted vocalizations scored and in bank alternative

probe 4 (castle materials), Bonnie had 16 unscripted vocalizations scored.

In the first mansion baseline, Bonnie had 8 unscripted vocalizations scored. In the third

mansion baseline, the session before training Bonnie had 18 unscripted vocalizations scored. In

the mansion mastery probe, Bonnie had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored. In the mansion

alternative probe 1 (bank materials); Bonnie had 5 unscripted vocalizations scored. In the

mansion alternative probe 2 (castle materials), Bonnie had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored. In

Bonnie’s second mansion probe she had 10 unscripted vocalizations scored. In mansion


alternative probe 3 (bank materials), Bonnie had 18 unscripted vocalizations scored and in

mansion alternative probe 4 (castle materials), Bonnie had 13 unscripted vocalizations scored.

In the first castle baseline, Bonnie had 3 unscripted vocalizations scored. In fourth castle

baseline, the baseline before training, Bonnie had 11 unscripted vocalizations scored. In the

castle mastery probe, Bonnie had 8 unscripted vocalizations scored. In castle alternative probe

1(bank materials), Bonnie had 5 unscripted vocalizations scored and in the castle alternative

probe 2 (mansion materials), Bonnie had 9 unscripted vocalizations scored.

Vincent’s Baseline, Training, and Mastery Probes

Results for Vincent are shown in Figure 3. Vincent had 5 baseline sessions on each play

set prior to training. Vincent’s average baseline scores for the bank were 0% for scripted

vocalizations, 9% for scripted actions. Average of the first five mansion baseline scores were 0%

of the scripted vocalizations and 4% of the scripted actions. The average of the first five castle

baseline session was 0% of the scripted vocalizations and 17% of the scripted actions.

Vincent began training on the bank play set at session 21 and took 5 sessions to meet

mastery criteria. Vincent completed 96% of the scripted vocalizations and 95% of the scripted

actions. Following bank training, Vincent completed 0% of the scripted vocalizations and 0% of

the scripted actions of the mansion script and 0% of the scripted vocalizations and 27% of the

scripted actions of the castle script.

Training began on the mansion play set in session 32. It took Vincent 6 sessions to meet


actions. Following mansion training, Vincent completed 5% of the scripted vocalizations and

17% of the scripted actions of the castle script.


Training for the castle play set began in session 51 and took Vincent 3 sessions to meet


actions. In bank probe 2 Vincent completed 87% of scripted vocalizations and 95% of scripted

actions. In mansion probe 2 Vincent completed 97% of the scripted vocalizations and 95% of the

scripted actions.

Vincent’s Alternative Material Probes

During alternative bank material probes 1 and 2, sessions 27 and 28, Vincent completed

5% of the recombined vocalizations and 17% of the recombined actions of alternative bank

probe 1(mansion materials). Vincent completed 0% of the recombined vocalizations and 37% of

the recombined actions during the bank alternative materials probe 2 (castle materials). During

the bank alternative probe 3 (mansion materials), session 50, Vincent completed 16% of the

recombined vocalizations and 37% of the recombined actions. During bank alternative probe

4(castle materials), session 51, Vincent completed 6% of the recombined vocalizations and 16%

of the recombined.

During mansion alternative materials probe 1 (bank materials) session 40, Vincent

completed 6% of the recombined vocalizations and 44% of the recombined actions. During

mansion alternative materials probe 2 (castle materials) session 41, Vincent completed 0% of the

recombined vocalizations and 28% of the recombined scripted actions. During the mansion

alternative probe 3 (bank materials) session 52 Vincent completed 2% of the recombined

vocalizations and 42% of the recombined actions. During mansion alternative probe 4 (castle

materials) session 53, Vincent completed 6% of the recombined vocalizations and 35% of the

recombined actions.


During the castle alternative probe l (bank materials) session 48 Vincent completed 2%

of the recombined vocalizations and 36% of the recombined actions. Vincent completed 6% of

the recombined vocalizations and 15% of the recombined actions during the castle alternative

probe 2 (mansion materials) session 49.

Vincent’s Alternative Materials Probes after Instructional Session

Prior to session 54 an additional recombined instructional session was run with this

participant to demonstrate how to recombine the actions and vocalizations with untrained

characters and materials. All the alternative material probes were then conducted. During the

bank alternative probe 5 (mansion materials) session 54, Vincent completed 88% of the

recombined vocalizations and 92% of the recombined actions. Vincent completed 82% of the

recombined vocalizations and 92% of the recombined actions during the bank alternative probe 6

(castle materials) session 55. During the mansion alternative probe 5 (bank materials) session 56

Vincent completed 79% of the recombined vocalizations and 92% of the recombined actions.

Vincent completed 6% of the recombined vocalizations and 35% of the recombined actions of

the mansion alternative probe 6 (castle materials) session 57. During the castle alternative probe

3(bank materials) session 58, Vincent completed 80% of the recombined vocalizations and 88%

of the recombined actions. Vincent completed 74% of the recombined vocalizations and 90% of

the recombined actions during the castle alternative probe 4 (mansion materials) session 59.

Vincent’s Percentage of Recombined Vocalizations and Actions


object, vehicle, and play set for Vincent. In alternative bank probes 1 and 3 (mansion materials)

sessions 27 and 50, Vincent recombined 11% of the actions completed by the villain after


mastering the bank script and 0% of mastering the castle script. He recombined 29% of the

actions using a hero character after mastering the bank script and 43% once the castle script was

mastered. Recombined vocalizations said by the villain were scored at 8% after the bank script

was mastered and 20% after the castle was mastered. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero

increased 0% after bank script mastery to 28% after castle script mastery. Recombined

vocalizations in which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or bank were mentioned increased from

an average of 0% after bank script mastery to 8% after castle script mastery.

In alternative bank probes 2 and 4 (castle materials) sessions 28 and 51, Vincent

recombined 0% of the actions completed by the villain after mastering the bank script and 0% of

mastering the castle script. He recombined 43% of the actions using a hero character after

mastering the bank script and 21% once the castle script was mastered. Recombined

vocalizations said by the villain were scored at 0% after the bank script was mastered and 0%

after the castle was mastered. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero increased 0% after

bank script mastery to 6% after castle script mastery. Recombined vocalizations in which the

object, villain, hero, vehicle, or bank were mentioned maintained an average of 0% after bank

script mastery to 0% after castle script mastery.

In alternative mansion probes 1 and 3 (bank materials) sessions 40 and 52, Vincent


0% of mastering the castle script. He recombined 40% of the actions using a hero character after

mastering the mansion script and 33% once the castle script was mastered. Recombined

vocalizations said by the villain were scored at 0% after the mansion script was mastered and 0%

after the castle was mastered. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero decreased from 13%



which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or mansion were mentioned decreased from 2% after

mansion script mastery to 0% after castle script mastery.

In alternative mansion probes 2 and 4 (castle materials) session 41 and 53, Vincent





after the castle was mastered. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero increased from 0%


which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or mansion were mentioned maintained at an average of

0% after mansion script mastery to 0% after castle script mastery.

In alternative castle probe 1(bank materials) session 48; Vincent recombined 11% of the

actions using the villain. He recombined 31% of the actions using a hero. Recombined

vocalizations said by the villain were scored at 0%. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero

were scored at 0%. Recombined vocalizations in which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or castle

were mentioned were scored at 0%.

In alternative castle probe 2 (mansion materials) session 49, Vincent recombined 22% of

the actions. He recombined 15% of the actions using a hero. Recombined vocalizations said by

the villain were scored at 10%. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero were scored at 12%.


were scored at 3%.


Vincent’s Recombined Vocalizations and Actions after Instructional Session

Prior to session 54 an additional recombined instructional session was run with this

participant to demonstrate how to recombine the actions and vocalizations with untrained

characters and materials. All the alternative material probes were administered. In alternative

bank probe 5 (mansion materials) session 54; Vincent recombined an average of 5.5% of the

actions completed by the villain prior to the instructional session and 100% after. He

recombined an average of 36% of the actions using a hero character prior to the instructional

session which increased to 70% after instruction. Recombined vocalizations said by the villain

were scored at an average of 14% which increased to 83% after the instructional session.

Recombined vocalizations said by the hero increased averaged 14% prior to instruction and

increased to 100%. Recombined vocalizations in which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or bank

were mentioned increased from an average of 4% prior to instructional recombination to 72%

after training.

In alternative bank probe 6 (castle materials) session 55; Vincent recombined an average

of 0% of the actions completed by the villain which increased to 100% after recombination

instruction. He recombined an average of 32% of the actions using a hero character prior to

instruction and 71% after. Recombined vocalizations said by the villain were scored at an

average of 0% which increased to100% after the participant was taught to recombine.

Recombined vocalizations said by the hero increased from an average of 3% to 100%.

Recombined vocalizations in which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or bank were mentioned

increased from an average of 0% to 75% after recombination instruction.


In alternative mansion probe 5 (bank materials) session 56; Vincent recombined an

average of 0% of the actions completed by the villain and 100% after the instructional session.

He recombined an average of 37% of the actions using a hero character after prior to instruction

and 87% after. Recombined vocalizations said by the villain was scored averaged 0% and

increased to 73% after recombination instruction. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero

increased from an average of 7% to 100% after the participant was taught to recombine.

Recombined vocalizations in which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or mansion were mentioned

increased from an average of 1% to an average of 85%.

In alternative mansion probe 6 (castle materials) session 57, Vincent recombined an

average of 0% of the villain’s actions prior to the instructional session and increased to 89%. He

recombined an average of 27% of the actions using a hero character which increased to 73%

after instruction. Recombined vocalizations said by the villain was scored with an average of 0%

and increased to 82%. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero averaged 23% and increased to

94% after recombination instruction. Recombined vocalizations in which the object, villain,

hero, vehicle, or mansion were mentioned averaged 0% prior to instruction and increased to an

average of 78% after training.

In alternative castle probe 3 (bank materials) session 58; prior to recombination

instruction, Vincent recombined 11% of the actions using the villain which increased to 89%. He

recombined 31% of the actions using a hero prior to instruction and 92% after. Recombined

vocalizations said by the villain were scored at 0% prior to recombination instruction, which

increased to 90%. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero were scored at 0% before training

and 88% after. Prior to recombination instruction recombined vocalizations in which the object,

villain, hero, vehicle, or castle were mentioned were scored at 0% this increased to76%.


In alternative castle probe 4 (mansion materials) session 59, Vincent recombined 22% of

the actions of the villain prior to recombination instruction which increased to 100%. He

recombined 15% of the actions using a hero prior to instruction which increased to 85%. Prior to

recombination instruction recombined vocalizations said by the villain was scored at 10% this

increased to 80%. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero was scored at 12% before training

and increased to 81%. Recombined vocalizations in which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or

castle were mentioned were scored at 3% prior to recombination instruction and increased to an

average of 71%.

Vincent’s Unscripted Vocalizations

Vincent’s unscripted vocalizations are shown in Figure 4. Unscripted vocalization data

was taken in the initial baseline, baseline before training, mastery probe, and the alternative

materials probes for each play set. In the first bank baseline, Vincent had 0 unscripted

vocalizations scored. In bank baseline 5, the baseline before training, Vincent had 0 unscripted

vocalizations scored. In the bank mastery probe, Vincent had 0 vocalizations scored. In the bank

alternative probe 1 (mansion materials), Vincent had 4 vocalizations scored. In the bank

alternative probe 2 (castle materials), Vincent had 1 vocalizations scored. In Vincent’s second

bank probe he had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored. In bank alternative probe 3 (mansion

materials), Vincent had 1 unscripted vocalizations scored and in the bank alternative probe 4

(castle materials), Vincent had 4 unscripted vocalizations scored. In bank alternative probe 5

(mansion materials), Vincent had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored and in the bank alternative

probe 6 (castle materials), Vincent had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored.


In the first mansion baseline, Vincent had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored. In the sixth

mansion baseline, the session before training, Vincent had 9 unscripted vocalizations scored. In

the mansion mastery probe, Vincent had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored. In the mansion

alternative probe 1 (bank materials), Vincent had 1 unscripted vocalizations scored. In the

mansion alternative probe 2 (castle materials), Vincent had 1 unscripted vocalizations scored. In

Vincent’s second mansion probe he had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored. In mansion alternative

probe 3 (bank materials), Vincent had 3 unscripted vocalizations scored and in mansion

alternative probe 4 (castle materials), Vincent had 3 unscripted vocalizations scored. In mansion

alternative probe 5 (bank materials), Vincent had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored and in

mansion alternative probe 6 (castle materials),

Vincent had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored. In the first castle baseline, Vincent had 0

unscripted vocalizations scored. In seventh castle baseline, the baseline before training, Vincent

had 6 unscripted vocalizations scored. In the castle mastery probe, Vincent had 0 unscripted

vocalizations scored. In castle alternative probe 1(bank materials), Vincent had 2 unscripted

vocalizations scored and in the castle alternative probe 2 (mansion materials), Vincent had 7

unscripted vocalizations scored. In castle alternative probe 3(bank materials), Vincent had 0

unscripted vocalizations scored and in the castle alternative probe 4 (mansion materials), Vincent

had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored.

Peter’s Baseline, Training, and Mastery Probes

Results for Peter are shown in Figure 5. Peter had 8 baseline sessions before training

began. Peter’s average baseline scores for the bank were 0% for scripted vocalizations, and 2 %

for scripted actions. Peter completed 0% of the scripted vocalizations and 7% of the scripted


actions for the mansion script. During the castle baselines Peter completed 1% of the scripted

vocalizations and 13% of the scripted actions. Peter began training on the bank play set at

session 31 and took 11 sessions to meet mastery criteria. Peter completed 93% of the scripted

vocalizations and 90% of the scripted actions. During baseline sessions following bank training,

Peter completed 0% of the scripted vocalizations and 13% of the scripted actions of the mansion

script and 0% of the scripted vocalizations and 14% of the scripted actions of the castle script.

Training began on the mansion play set in session 48. It took Peter 6 sessions to meet

mastery criteria. Peter completed 100% of the scripted vocalizations and 83% of the scripted

actions. In bank probe 2 Peter completed 93% of scripted vocalizations and 88% of scripted

actions. During a castle baseline following mansion training Peter completed 0% of the scripted

vocalizations and 14% of the scripted actions.

Training for the castle play set began in session 74 and took Peter 6 sessions to meet

mastery criteria. Peter completed 97% of the scripted vocalizations and 81% of the scripted

actions. In bank probe 3 Peter completed 100% of scripted vocalizations and 88% of scripted

actions. In mansion probe 2 Peter completed 100% of the scripted vocalizations and 77% of the

scripted actions.

Peter’s Alternative Materials Probes

During bank alternative materials probe 1 (mansion materials) session 43, Peter

completed 2% of the recombined vocalizations and 13% of the recombined actions. During bank

alternative probe 2 (castle materials), session 44, Peter completed 0% of the recombined

vocalizations and 13% of the recombined actions. During the bank alternative materials probe 3

(mansion materials) session 58, Peter completed 0% of the recombined vocalizations and 3% of


the recombined actions. Peter completed 0% of the recombined vocalizations and 14% of the

recombined actions during the bank alternative materials probe 4 (castle materials) session 59.

During bank alternative probe 5 (bank materials) session 72, Peter completed 6% of the

recombined vocalizations and 8% of the recombined actions. Peter completed 2% of the

recombined vocalizations and 16% of the recombined actions during the bank alternative probe 6

(castle materials), session 73.

During mansion alternative materials probe 1 (bank materials) session 55, Peter

completed 0% of the recombined vocalizations and 26% of the recombined actions. During

mansion alternative materials probe 2 (castle materials) session 56, Peter completed 2% of the

recombined vocalizations and 9% of the recombined actions. During the mansion alternative

probe 3 (bank materials) session 75, Peter completed 0% of the recombined vocalizations and

6% of the recombined actions.

During the castle alternative probe l (bank materials) session 69, Peter completed 4% of

the recombined vocalizations and 6% of the recombined actions. Peter completed 2% of the

recombined vocalizations and 0% of the recombined actions during the castle alternative probe 2

(mansion materials) session 70.

Peter’s Alternative Materials Probes after Instructional Session

At this point an instruction session was run with this participant to demonstrate how to

recombine actions and vocalizations with untrained characters and materials a preferred item was

also given to the participant contingent upon completion of the session. Peter completed 65% of

the recombined vocalizations and 43% of the recombined actions of the mansion alternative

probe 4 (castle materials) session 76.


After recombination training the previous alternative material probes were run.

During the castle alternative probe 3 (bank materials) session77, Peter completed 83% of the

recombined vocalizations and 74% of the recombined actions. Peter completed 100% of the

recombined vocalizations and 60% of the recombined actions during the castle alternative probe

4 (mansion materials) session 78. During the bank alternative probe 7 (mansion materials)

session 79, Peter completed 96% of the recombined vocalizations and 81% of the recombined

actions. Peter completed 89% of the recombined vocalizations and 80% of the recombined

actions during the bank alternative probe 8 (castle materials) session 80. During the mansion

alternative probe 5 (bank materials) session 81, Peter completed 98% of the recombined

vocalizations and 81% of the recombined actions. Peter completed 94% of the scripted

vocalizations and 82% of the scripted actions of the mansion alternative probe 6 (castle

materials) session 82.

Peter’s Recombined Vocalizations and Actions


object, vehicle, and play set for Peter. In alternative bank probes 1, 3, and 5 (mansion materials)

sessions 43, 58, and 72, recombined 0% of the actions completed by the villain after mastering

the bank script and 0% and recombined 11 % after mastery of both the mansion and the castle

script. He recombined 11% of the actions using a hero character after mastering the bank script

11% after the mansion script and decreased to 0% once the castle script was mastered.

Recombined vocalizations said by the villain was scored at 0% after the bank script and

remained at 0% after both the mansion and castle scripts were mastered. Recombined

vocalizations remained at 0% after mastery of the bank script, mansion script, and castle script.



decreased from an average of 3% after bank script mastery to 0% after both mansion script

mastery and castle script mastery.

In alternative bank probes 2, 4, and 6 (castle materials) sessions 44, 59, and 73,Peter

recombined 11% of the actions completed by the villain after mastering the bank script his

percent of recombination’s remained at 11% after both the mansion and castle script were

mastered. He recombined 7% of the actions using a hero character after mastering the bank script

8% once the mansion script was mastered and increased to 14% once the castle script was

mastered. Recombined vocalizations said by the villain was scored at 0% after the bank script,

and remained at 0% after mansion script, and castle script mastery. Recombined vocalizations

said by the hero remained at 0% after the bank, mansion, and castle script were mastered.


remained at 0% after bank mastery, mansion mastery, and castle mastery.

In alternative mansion probes 1 and 3 (bank materials) sessions 55 and 75, Peter





after the castle was mastered. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero remained at 0% after

mansion script mastery and 0% after castle script mastery. Recombined vocalizations in which

the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or mansion were mentioned remained at 0% after mansion script

mastery and 0% after castle script mastery.


In alternative castle probe 1 (bank materials present) session 69, Peter recombined 0% of

the actions using the villain. He recombined 0% of the actions using a hero. Recombined

vocalizations said by the villain were scored at 0%. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero

were scored at 6%. Recombined vocalizations in which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or castle

were mentioned averaged a score of 0%.

In alternative castle probe 2 (mansion materials) session 70, Peter recombined 0% of the

actions. He recombined 0% of the actions using a hero. Recombined vocalizations said by the

villain were scored at 0%. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero were scored at 6%.


were scored at 0%.

Peter’s Recombined Vocalizations and Actions after Instructional Session

Prior to session 76, an additional recombination instructional session was administered a

preferred item was also offered to the participant contingent on completion of the session. In

alternative mansion probe 4 (castle materials) session 76, Peter recombined 0% of the actions

completed by the villain after mastering the mansion script and 22% after the recombination

instructional session. He recombined 7% of the actions using a hero character after mastering the

mansion script and 20% once the instructional session was administered. Recombined

vocalizations said by the villain was scored at 0% after the mansion and increased to 27% after

the instructional session. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero increased from 0% after

mansion script mastery to 94% after recombination instruction. Recombined vocalizations in

which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or mansion were mentioned increased from an average of

0% after mansion script mastery to 76% after recombination training.


In alternative bank probe 7 (mansion materials) session 79; Peter recombined an average

of 7% of the actions completed by the villain prior to the instructional session and 89% after. He

recombined an average of 0% of the actions using a hero character prior to the instructional

session which increased to 64% after instruction. Recombined vocalizations said by the villain

were scored at an average of 0% which increased to 100% after the instructional session.

Recombined vocalizations said by the hero increased from an averaged 2% prior to instruction

to100% after. Recombined vocalizations in which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or bank were

mentioned increased from an average of 0% prior to instructional recombination to 96% after

training.

In alternative bank probe 8 (castle materials) session 80; Peter recombined an average of

7% of the actions completed by the villain which increased to an average of 78% after

recombination instruction. He recombined an average of 10% of the actions using a hero

character prior to instruction and 57% after. Recombined vocalizations said by the villain were

scored at an average of 0% which increased to 92% after the participant was taught to

recombine. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero increased from an average of 0% to

100%. Recombined vocalizations in which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or bank were

mentioned increased from an average of 0% to 96% after recombination instruction.

Two alternative mansion probes were administered after recombination instruction. In

alternative mansion probe 5 (bank materials) session 81; Peter recombined an average of 0% of

the actions completed by the villain and 78% after the instructional session. He recombined an

average of 3.5% of the actions using a hero character after prior to instruction and 60% after.

Recombined vocalizations said by the villain was scored averaged 0% and increased to 92% after

recombination instruction. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero increased from an average


of 0% to 83% after the participant was taught to recombine. Recombined vocalizations in which

the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or mansion were mentioned increased from an average of 0% to

an average of 97%.

In alternative mansion probe 6 (castle materials present) session 82, Peter recombined an

average of 0% of the villain’s actions prior to the instructional session and increased to an

average 44.5%. He recombined an average of 7% of the actions using a hero character which

increased to an average of 43.5% after instruction. Recombined vocalizations said by the villain

was scored with an average of 0% and increased to an average of 59%. Recombined

vocalizations said by the hero averaged 0% and increased to 97% after recombination

instruction. Recombined vocalizations in which the object, villain, hero, vehicle, or mansion

were mentioned averaged 0% prior to instruction and increased to an average of 88% after

training.

In alternative castle probe 3 (bank materials) session 77, prior to recombination

instruction, Peter recombined 0% of the actions using the villain which increased to 56%. He

recombined 0% of the actions using a hero prior to instruction and 62% after. Recombined

vocalizations said by the villain were scored at 0% prior to recombination instruction, which

increased to 50%. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero were scored at 6% before training

and 100% after. Prior to recombination instruction recombined vocalizations in which the

object, villain, hero, vehicle, or castle were mentioned were scored at 0% this increased to 85%.

In alternative castle probe 4 (mansion materials) session 78, Peter recombined 0% of the

actions of the villain prior to recombination instruction which increased to 67%. He recombined

0% of the actions using a hero prior to instruction which increased to 69%. Prior to


recombination instruction recombined vocalizations said by the villain was scored at 0% this

increased to 100%. Recombined vocalizations said by the hero was scored at 6% before the

instructional session and increased to 100%. Recombined vocalizations in which the object,

villain, hero, vehicle, or castle were mentioned were scored at 0% prior to recombination

instruction and increased to an average of 100%.

Peter’s Unscripted Vocalizations

Results for Peter’s unscripted vocalizations are shown in Figure 6. Unscripted

vocalization data was taken in the initial baseline, baseline before training, mastery probe, and

the alternative materials probes for each play set. In the first bank baseline, Peter had 1

unscripted vocalization scored. In bank baseline 8, the baseline before training, Peter had 1

unscripted vocalization scored. In the bank mastery probe, Peter had 1 vocalization scored. In the

bank alternative probe 1 (mansion materials), Peter had 0 vocalizations scored. In the bank

alternative probe 2 (castle materials), Peter had 1 vocalization scored. In Peter’s second bank

probe he had 1 unscripted vocalization scored. In bank alternative probe 3(mansion materials),

Peter had 1 unscripted vocalization scored and in the bank alternative probe 4 (castle materials),

Peter had 1 unscripted vocalization scored. In Peter’s third bank probe he had 1 unscripted

vocalization scored. In bank alternative probe 5 (mansion materials), Peter had 2 unscripted

vocalizations scored and in the bank alternative probe 6 (castle materials), Peter had 0 unscripted

vocalizations scored. In bank alternative probe 7 (mansion materials), Peter had 0 unscripted

vocalizations scored and in the bank alternative probe 8 (castle materials), Peter had 1 unscripted

vocalization scored.


In Peter’s first mansion baseline, 0 unscripted vocalizations were scored. In the first

mansion baseline, Peter had 2 unscripted vocalizations scored. In the ninth mansion baseline, the

session before training, Peter had 1 unscripted vocalization scored. In the mansion mastery

probe, Peter had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored. In the mansion alternative probe 1 (bank

materials); Peter had 1 unscripted vocalization scored. In the mansion alternative probe 2 (castle

materials), Peter had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored. In Peter’s second mansion probe he had 1

unscripted vocalization scored. In mansion alternative probe 3 (bank materials), Peter had 0

unscripted vocalizations scored and in mansion alternative probe 4 (castle materials), Peter had 1

unscripted vocalization scored. In mansion alternative probe 5 (bank materials), Peter had 1

unscripted vocalization scored and in mansion alternative probe 6 (castle materials), Peter had 2

unscripted vocalizations scored.

In the first castle baseline, Peter had 1 unscripted vocalization scored. In tenth castle

baseline, the baseline before training, Peter had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored. In the castle

mastery probe, Peter had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored. In castle alternative probe 1(bank

materials), Peter had 1 unscripted vocalization scored and in the castle alternative probe 2

(mansion materials), Peter had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored. In castle alternative probe 3

(bank materials), Peter had 0 unscripted vocalizations scored and in the castle alternative probe 4

(mansion materials), Peter had 1 unscripted vocalization scored.

Total Script Completion for All Participants

Figure 7 shows the total script completion for all 3 participants. Bonnie finished the study

in session 40. She was in baseline until session 8. She had 6 bank training sessions before a


mastery probe in session 14. Mansion training started in session 20 she mastered this script in 3

sessions, before a mastery probe in session 23. Castle training began in session 28.

Vincent completed the study in session 81. He was in baseline until session 39. He had 5

bank training sessions before a mastery probe in session 45. Mansion training started in session

53, he had 6 training session before a mastery probe in session 58. He had 3 castle training

sessions starting in session 63. A mastery probe was run in session 66.

Peter completed the study in session 134. He was in baseline until session 83. He had 11

bank training sessions before a mastery probe in session 94. Mansion training started in session

100 and lasted until session 105. Castle training began in session 114 and finished in session 118.

Discussion

There have been several approaches to teaching children to engage in generative play.

The substitutable loops used in Roberts (2007), were successful in producing novel play

behavior. Using toys that are share similar components may also produce generative play. The

use of a matrix attempts to demonstrate the various recombinations are possible. The several

studies that have employed matrix training to teach various skills have been successful producing

novel or generative recombinations. Using matrices to teach participants to engage in novel play

have proven to be successful.

In the current study, all three participants acquired the scripts at a rapid rate. Each

participant mastered the scripts at a more rapid rate after being trained on at least one script. This

may have been due to the similarities in each script. The training sessions only included the play

sets and materials that were included in the specific training video. During training sessions only

scripted actions and scripted vocalizations were scored. If all materials were present during

training there may be a slightly different outcome.


It would be interesting to examine the effects of combining substitutable loops in video

modeling used in the Roberts (2007) study with the matrix. By adding these two techniques

together it may be more likely to produce results in which the participant combines several of the

scripts together. If all the materials were available in a probe after the participant learned the

scripts with a substitutable loop the participant may perform more recombinations.

The results obtained from this study are similar to those found by MacManus and

MacDonald (2010). After one of the play sets was mastered the participants performed some of

the recombinations with the other untrained characters, objects, and play sets. Two of the three

participants did not recombine the vocalizations and actions until additional instructional

sessions were administered. This may have been due to the length and difficulty of the scripts.

Although recombination did not occur during the first alternative probe sessions, both

participants, performed the majority of the recombination’s immediately after the recombination

instructional session without any further prompting. One of the participants was noncompliant

during some of the baseline and probe sessions this could have been due to his familiarity with

the experimenter. During all sessions participants were given approximately 5 minutes to

manipulate the play materials. Given this short duration the participants only had a short time to

perform the scripted play scenario. With longer sessions there is a possibility of more

recombinations or more unscripted play.

There are many options for future research. Matrix training offers a systematic approach

to developing probes to anticipate the recombinations that are possible with this type of

procedure. Future research should aim to use matrix training when teaching various skills to

children in this population. An important area of research may be teaching social skills to

children with an autism spectrum disorder.


References

Ayres, K. M., & Langone, J., (2005). Intervention and instruction with video for students with

autism: a review of the literature. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities,

40, 183-196.

Calabrese, N. (2003). Developing quality sociodramatic play for young children. Education,123,

3.

Charlop M., & Milstein, J. (1989). Teaching autistic children conversational speech using video

modeling. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 22, 275-285.

Charlop-Christy, M. H., Le, L., & Freeman, K. A. (2000). A comparison of video modeling

with in vivo modeling for teaching children with autism. Journal of Autism and

Developmental Disorders, 30, 537-555.

Coleman, S., & Stedman, J.M. (1974). Use of a peer model in language training in an echoic

child. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 5, 275-279.

Dauphin, M., Kinney, E.M., & Stromer, R. (2004). Using video-enhanced activity schedules and

matrix training to teach sociodramatic play to a child with autism. Journal of Positive

Behavior Interventions, 6, 238-251.

Delano, M., E. (2007). Video modeling interventions for individuals with autism. Remedial and

Special Education, 28, 33-42.

Garfinkle, A. N., & Schwartz, I. S. (2002). Peer imitation: increasing social interactions in

children with autism and other developmental disabilities in inclusive preschool

classrooms. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 22, 26-38.

Goldstein, H., & Mousetis, L., (1989). Generalized language learning by children with severe

mental retardation: effects of peers’ expressive modeling. Journal of Applied Behavior

Analysis, 22, 245-259.

Koegel, L. K., Koegal, R. L., Frea, W. D., & Fredeen, R. M., (2001). Identifying early

intervention target for children with autism in inclusive school settings. Behavior

Modification, 25, 754-761.


MacDonald, R.P.F., Sacramone, S.R., Mansfield, R., Wiltz, K., & Ahearn, W.H. (2009).

Using video modeling to teach reciprocal pretend play to children with autism. Journal

of Applied Behavior Analysis. 42, 43-55.

MacManus, C., & MacDonald, R.P.F. (May 2010). Video modeling and matrix training to teach

pretend play in children with autism. Paper to be presented at the annual conference of

the Association for Behavior Analysis, San Antonio, TX.

McCoy, K., & Hermansen, E. (2007) Video modeling for individuals with autism: a review of

model types and effects. Education & Treatment of Children, 30, 183-214.

McGee, G.C., Feldman, R.S., & Chernin, L., (1991). A comparison of emotional facial display

by children with autism and typical preschoolers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,

18. 3-16.

Nikopoulos, C. K., & Keenan, M. (2004). Effects of video modeling on social initiations by

children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 37, 93-96.

Paterson, C. R., & Arco, L., (2007). Using Video modeling for generalizing toy play in children

with autism, Behavior Modification 31(5) 660-681.

Reagon, K. A., Higbee, S., & Endicott, K. (2006). Teaching pretend play skills to a student with

autism using video modeling with a sibling as model and play partner. Education and

Treatment of Children, 29, 1-12.

Roberts, S., MacDonald, R. P. F., & Ahearn, W. H. (2007). A method to teach varied play to

children with ASD using video modeling. Autism and Related Developmental

Disabilities: Special Interest Group Newsletter. 23, 1-2.

Taylor, B., Levin, L., & Jasper, S. (1999). Increasing play-related statements in children with

autism toward their siblings: effects of video modeling, Journal of Developmental and

Physical Disabilities, 11, 253-264.

U.S. Department of Education. (1999). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act: Part 300.

Federal Register, 64 (8), 12418-12480.


Table 1 Mean interobserver Agreement for Bonnie across all play sets.

Bank Mansion Castle IOA for Vocalizations

97.5% (range, 88%-100%)

99% (range, 97%-100%)

98% (range, 97%-100%)

IOA for Actions

95.3% (range, 88%-100%)

95.3% (range, 93%-100%)

96% (range, 91%-100%)

IOA for Recombined Vocalizations (During Alterative Materials Probes)

96%

98.2% (range, 96.3%-100%)

98%

IOA for Recombined Actions (During Alterative Materials Probes)

95.5%

91.5% (range, 86%-97%)

80%

IOA for Unscripted Vocalizations (During Baseline, Probes, and Alternative Material Probes)

93%

(range, 80%-100%)


Table 2 Mean interobserver agreement for Vincent across all play sets.


97.4% (range, 93%-100%)

99.3% (range, 97%-100%)

99.3% (range, 97%-100%)

IOA for Actions

96.2% (range, 93%-100%)

97.4% (range, 87%-100%)

96.5% (range, 89%-100%)


100%

94% (range, 88%-100%)

98% (range, 96%-100%)


95%

86% (range, 83%-88%)

83% (range, 80%-85%)


100%


Table 3 Mean interobserver agreement for Peter across all play sets.


95% (range, 90%-100%)

96% (range, 83%-100%)

99.6% (range, 97%-100%)

IOA for Actions

93% (range, 80%-100%)

96% (range, 83%-100%)

94% (range, 85%-100%)


94% (range, 92%-96%)

98%

100%


91.5% (range, 91%-92%)

93% (range, 91%-94%)

100%


100%


Table 4 The percentage of actions and vocalizations recombined for each character, object, vehicle, and play set for Bonnie.

After Bank Training After Mansion Training After Castle Training

Alt. Bank Probe 1(Mansion materials)

Alt. Bank Probe 2 (Castle materials)

Alt. Bank Probe 3 (Mansion materials)

Alt. Bank Probe 4 (Castle

materials) 6 % of recombs. % of recombs. % of recombs. % of recombs.

Actions using Villain 55 33 88 67 Actions using Hero 0 27 86 79 Actions using Object 0 33 100 75 Actions using Vehicle 0 75 100 100 Vocals said by Villain 20 0 60 60 Vocals said by Hero 6 11 94 100 Vocals in which Object is mentioned 20 0 40 60 Vocals in which Villain is mentioned 0 0 100 33 Vocals in which Hero is mentioned 0 0 100 100 Vocals in which Vehicle is mentioned 10 0 100 100 100 Vocals in which Bank is mentioned 0 17 83 50

Alt. Mansion Probe 1 (Bank

materials)

Alt. Mansion Probe 2(Castle

materials)


materials)

Alt. Mansion Probe 4(Castle

materials) % of recombs. % of recombs. % of recombs. % of recombs.

Actions using Villain 67 44 44 56 Actions using Hero 33 67 67 87 Actions using Object 25 0 25 75 Actions using Vehicle 83 89 100 100 Vocals said by Villain 27 45 9 55 Vocals said by Hero 50 75 0 88 Vocals in which Object is mentioned 50 0 25 67 Vocals in which Villain is mentioned 17 0 0 83 Vocals in which Hero is mentioned 0 0 0 100 Vocals in which Vehicle is mentioned 100 0 0 100 Vocals in which Mansion is mentioned 0 0 14 57

Alt. Castle Probe 1 (Bank

materials)

Alt. Castle Probe 2 (Mansion materials)

% of recombs. % of recombs.

Actions using Villain 78 82 Actions using Hero 85 85 Actions using Object 100 67 Actions using Vehicle 100 100 Vocals said by Villain 82 80 Vocals said by Hero 100 100 Vocals in which Object is mentioned 100 0 Vocals in which Villain is mentioned 100 100 Vocals in which Hero is mentioned 100 100 Vocals in which Vehicle is mentioned 100 100 Vocals in which Castle is mentioned 33 50


Table 5 The percentage of actions and vocalizations recombined for each character, object,

vehicle, and play set for Vincent.

After Bank Training

After Mansion Training

After Castle Training

Rec


Alt. Bank Probe

2(Castle materials)

Alt. Bank Probe 3

(Mansion materials)


materials)

Alt. Bank Probe 5

(Mansion materials)


materials) % of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

Actions using Villain 11 43 0 0 100 100 Actions using Hero 29 0 43 21 70 71 Actions using Object 0 83 0 0 100 100 Actions using Vehicle 8 0 100 67 100 100 Vocals said by Villain 0 0 20 0 83 67 Vocals said by Hero 0 0 28 6 100 100 Vocals in which Object is mentioned 0 0 0 0 80 80 Vocals in which Villain is mentioned 0 0 0 0 100 83 Vocals in which Hero is mentioned 0 0 0 0 0 50 Vocals in which Vehicle is mentioned

0 0 0 0 100 100

Vocals in which Bank is mentioned 0 0 40 0 80 60


materials)

Alt. Mansion Probe 2 (Castle

materials)

Alt. Mansion

Probe 3Bank

materials)


materials)

Alt. Mansion Probe5(B

ank materials)


materials)

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.


0 0 0 0 100 100

Vocals in which Mansion is mentioned

0 0 0 0 57 57

Alt. Castle Probe

1(Bank materials)

Alt. Castle Probe 2

(Mansion materials)


materials)

Alt. Castle Probe 4

(Mansion materials)

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

Actions using Villain 11 22 89 100 Actions using Hero 31 15 92 85 Actions using Object 0 5 75 100 Actions using Vehicle 83 33 100 100 Vocals said by Villain 0 10 90 80 Vocals said by Hero 0 12 88 81 Vocals in which Object is mentioned 0 0 60 60 Vocals in which Villain is mentioned 0 0 50 80 Vocals in which Hero is mentioned 0 0 100 50 Vocals in which Vehicle is mentioned

0 0 100 100

Vocals in which Castle is mentioned 0 17 71 67

After Recomb.


Table 6 The percentage of actions and vocalizations recombined for each character, object,

vehicle, and play set for Peter.

After Bank Training

After Mansion Training

After Castle Training


Alt. Bank Probe2 (Castle

materials)

Alt. Bank Probe 3

(Mansion materials)


materials)

Alt. Bank Probe 5

(Mansion materials)


materials)

Alt. Bank Probe 7

(Mansion materials)


materials) % of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

Actions using Villain 0 7 11 0 11 0 89 78 Actions using Hero 0 0 0 8 0 14 64 57 Actions using Object 0 44 0 0 0 0 33 75 Actions using Vehicle 0 0 0 56 0 67 100 100 Vocals said by Villain 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 92 Vocals said by Hero 6 0 0 0 0 0 80 100 Vocals in which Object is mentioned 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 80 Vocals in which Villain is mentioned 17 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 Vocals in which Hero is mentioned 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 Vocals in which Vehicle is mentioned

0 0 0 0 0 0 100 100

Vocals in which Bank is mentioned 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 100

Alt. Mansion

Probe 1(Bank

materials)


materials)

Alt. Mansion

Probe 3(Bank

materials)


materials)

Alt. Mansion

Probe 5(Bank

materials)


materials)

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.


0 0 0 100 100 100

Vocals in which Mansion is mentioned

0 0 0 48 100 100

Alt. Castle

Probe 1 (Bank

materials)

Alt. Castle Probe 2

(Mansion materials)


materials)

Alt. Castle Probe 4

(Mansion materials)

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

% of recombs.

Actions using Villain 0 0 56 67 Actions using Hero 0 0 62 69 Actions using Object 0 0 75 50 Actions using Vehicle 17 0 100 100 Vocals said by Villain 0 0 50 100 Vocals said by Hero 6 6 100 100 Vocals in which Object is mentioned 0 0 60 100 Vocals in which Villain is mentioned 0 0 100 100 Vocals in which Hero is mentioned 0 0 100 100 Vocals in which Vehicle is mentioned

0 0 100 100

Vocals in which Castle is mentioned 0 0 67 100

Recomb.


Figure Captions

Figure 1 Bonnie’s scripted vocals and actions and recombined vocals and actions for each play

set.

Figure 2 Bonnie’s unscripted vocals for baseline, mastery probes, and alternative material probes

for each play set.

Figure 3 Vincent’s scripted vocals and actions and recombined vocals and actions for each play

set.

Figure 4 Vincent’s unscripted vocals for baseline, mastery probes, and alternative material

probes for each play set.

Figure 5 Peter’s scripted vocals and actions and recombined vocals and actions for each play set.

Figure 6 Peter’s unscripted vocals for baseline, mastery probes, and alternative material probes

for each play set.

Figure 7 Combined percentage of vocals and actions for all participants.


Figure 1.


Figure 2.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Unscripted Vocalizations

Bank

Mansion Castle


Figure 3.

Probes after

Recombination

Instruction

Probes after

Recombination

Instruction

Probes after

Recombination

Instruction


Figure 4.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Ba

seli

ne

5

Pro

be

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

1

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

2

Pro

be

2

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

3

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

4

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

5

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

6

Ba

seli

ne

1

Ba

seli

ne

6

Pro

be

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

1

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

2

Pro

be

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

3

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

4

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

5

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

6

Ba

seli

ne

1

Ba

seli

ne

7

Pro

be

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

1

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

2

Ate

rna

tive

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

3

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

4


Bank MansionCastle

Figure 5

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1 6 11 16 21 26

Baseline

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1 6 11 16 21

Baseline

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1 6 11 16 21 26 31

Baseline

Video Modeling and Matrix Training

26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 81 86 91 96

Mastery Probes

Bank

21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 81 86 91

Baseline

Mastery Probes

Recombined

Probes

31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 81 86 91 96

Castle

Recombined

Probes

Mastery

ProbeBaseline

Training

Recombined

Probes

Training

Probes after

Recombination

Instruction


Vocals

Actions

91 96

Vocals

Actions

Mansion

Vocals

Actions

Castle

Recombined

Probes after

Recombination

Instruction

Probes after

Recombination

Instruction

Probes after

Recombination

Instruction


Figure 6.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Ba

seli

ne

1

Ba

seli

ne

8

Pro

be

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

1

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

2

Pro

be

2

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

3

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

4

Pro

be

3

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

5

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

6

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

7

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

8

Ma

nsi

on

Ba

seli

ne

1

Ba

seli

ne

9

Pro

be

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

1

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

2

Pro

be

2

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

3

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

4

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

5

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

6

cast

le

Ba

seli

ne

1

Ba

seli

ne

10

Pro

be

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

1

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

2

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

3

Alt

ern

ati

ve

Ma

teri

als

Pro

be

4


BankMansion Castle


Figure 7.

Appendix 1. Bank play set and materials


Appendices

set and materials


Appendix 2. Mansion play set and materials


Mansion play set and materials


Appendix 3. Castle play set and materials


Castle play set and materials



Appendix 4. Bank scenario script

OBJECTS ACTIONS (41) VOCALS (30)

Bank playset & Joker Joker walks in from the left Joker “Ha, ha, ha! I’m going to steal all the money from the bank!” Joker Walk Joker to the white door White door Open white door Joker “Rats! It’s not in this room!” White door Close white door Joker Walk Joker to the black door Black door Open black door Joker “Double rats! It’s not in this room!” Black door Close black door Joker “The money must be in the vault!” Joker Walk Joker to the vault door Joker “I’ll use the dynamite to open the vault TNT Button Push TNT button “BOOM!” Joker “Wow! That’s a lot of money! I’m going to be rich! Ha, ha, ha!” Joker & money Pick Joker up, place money on arm. Joker “I’ll climb to the top of the bank to wait for my getaway driver to arrive!” Joker & money Climb Joker to the roof of the bank Joker “Now I’ll be able to see any silly hero coming here to try and stop me before they

see me!” Batcave playset “Ring, ring!” Batcave playset Slide yellow button to the right to open purple door revealing Batman Batman “An alarm at the Batcomputer, I’ll answer it!” Batman Pick up Batman, jump him down to the ground Batman Walk over to the Batcomputer “Someone has stolen the money from the bank!” Batman “It must be the Joker!” Batman “I’ll drive the Batmobile to the bank” Batcave Turn red circle beside middle blue door to the right Batmobile Reach through and pick up the Batmobile, drive through ramp Batman Walk Batman over to the Batmobile “Time to get in” Batmobile Open roof Batman & Batmobile Pick Batman up and sit him down into the Batmobile Batman “I’ll need the Bat-a-rang” Bat-a-rang Pick up Bat-a-rang from black alcove Bat-a-rang Put in Batmobile beside Batman Batmobile Close roof Batman in Batmobile “To the bank!” Batman in Batmobile “I must stop the Joker!” Batman in Batmobile Drive Batmobile to front of the bank “VROOM! VROOM!” Batman in Batmobile “I’ve arrived at the bank” Batmobile Open roof of Batmobile Bat-a-rang Pick Bat-a-rang out of the Batmobile Batman Pick Batman out of the Batmobile Batman & Bat-a-rang Pick up Bat-a-rang, put in Batman’s hand Batman “Now time to find the Joker!” Batman Walk Batman to the white door White door Open white door Batman “He’s not in here” White door Close white door Batman Walk Batman to the black door Black door Open black door Batman “He’s not in here either! Where is he?” Black door Close black door Joker “Oh no! That FATman has shown up to stop me! I’ll have to take care of him!” Joker Jump Joker down to the ground, facing towards Batman Batman Turn Batman to face Joker Batman “Joker! You’ll never get away with stealing the money!” Joker “You’re too late Batman! Ha, ha! Once I deal with you, I’ll be away scot-free! Ha,

ha, ha!” Batman “I don’t think so Joker!” Batman & Bat-a-rang Pull Bat-a-rang off of Batman’s hand Batman “Take this!” Bat-a-rang Spin through air towards Joker Bat-a-rang & Joker Bat-a-rang hits Joker and knocks him over Joker “AHHH!” Joker & money Pull money off Joker Batman Walk Batman over to Joker Batman & money Put money on Batman’s arm Batman “Remember Joker, crime doesn’t pay!”


Appendix 5. Mansion scenario script


Mansion playset & Penguin

Penguin walks in from the right to the middle of the mansion playset

Penguin “Ha, ha, ha! I’m going to steal the world’s biggest diamond from the mansion!” Penguin Walk Penguin to the window on the right Penguin “Rats! It’s not in this room!” Penguin Walk Penguin to the window on the left Penguin “Double rats! It’s not in this room!” Penguin Walk Penguin to the middle of the mansion Penguin “The diamond must be on the 2nd floor” Penguin “I’ll climb up the side of the mansion to get it!” Penguin Climb Penguin up the side of the mansion to the 2nd floor Penguin “Wow! That’s a really big diamond! I’m going to be rich! Ha, ha, ha!” Penguin & diamond Pick Penguin up, place diamond on arm. Penguin “I’ll climb to the top of the mansion to wait for my getaway driver to arrive!” Penguin & diamond Climb Penguin up to the roof of the mansion Penguin “Now I’ll be able to see any silly hero coming here to try and stop me before they

see me!” Batcave playset “Ring, ring!” Batcave playset Turn red circle at the top right of the Batcave playset to raise the

elevator “An alarm at the Batcomputer, I’ll answer it!”

Robin Pick up Robin from the elevator Robin Climb Robin down the purple ladder Robin Walk over to the Batcomputer “Someone has stolen the diamond from the mansion!” Robin “It must be the Penguin!” Robin “I’ll drive the Batcycle to the mansion” Batcave & Batcycle Reach through left hand blue door and pick up the Batcycle, drive

through ramp

Robin Walk Robin over to the Batcycle “Time to get in” Robin & Batcycle Pick Robin up, and sit him down into the Batcycle Robin “I’ll need the Bat-a-rang” Bat-a-rang Pick up Bat-a-rang from black alcove Bat-a-rang Put in Batcycle beside Robin Robin in Batcycle “To the mansion!” Robin in the Batcycle “I must stop the Penguin!” Robin in Batcycle Drive Batcycle to front of the mansion “VROOM, VROOM!” Robin in Batcycle “I’ve arrived at the mansion” Bat-a-rang Pick Bat-a-rang out of the Batcycle Robin Pick Robin out of the Batcycle Robin & Bat-a-rang Pick up Bat-a-rang, put in Robin’s hand Robin “Now time to find the Penguin!” Robin Walk Robin to the window on the left Robin “He’s not in here” Robin Walk Robin to the window on the right Robin “He’s not in here either! Where is he?” Penguin “Oh no! That bird-brain Robin has shown up to stop me! I’ll have to take care of

him!” Penguin Jump Penguin down to the bottom of mansion, facing towards Robin Robin Turn Robin to face Penguin Robin “Penguin! You’ll never get away with stealing the diamond!” Penguin “You’re too late Robin! Ha, ha! Once I deal with you, I’ll be away scot-free! Ha,

ha, ha!” Robin “I don’t think so Penguin!” Robin & Bat-a-rang Pull Bat-a-rang off of Robin’s hand Robin “Take this!” Bat-a-rang Spin through air towards Penguin Bat-a-rang & Penguin Bat-a-rang hits Penguin and knocks him over Penguin “Oh no! The diamond!” Penguin & diamond Pull diamond off Penguin Robin Walk Robin over to Penguin

Robin & diamond Put diamond on Robin’s hand Robin “Remember Penguin, crime doesn’t pay!”


Appendix 6. Castle scenario script


Castle playset & Mr. Freeze

Mr. Freeze walks in from the right to the middle of the castle playset

Mr. Freeze “Ha, ha, ha! I’m going to steal the world’s most expensive ring from the castle!” Mr. Freeze Walk Mr. Freeze to the window on the right, jump up to look in Mr. Freeze “Rats! It’s not in this room!” Mr. Freeze Walk Mr. Freeze to the window on the left, jump up to look in Mr. Freeze “Double rats! It’s not in this room!” Mr. Freeze “The ring must be hidden in the castle’s storage room”” Mr. Freeze Walk Mr. Freeze over to green alcove at the left side of the castle Mr. Freeze “Wow! That’s a really beautiful ring! I’m going to be rich! Ha, ha, ha!” Mr. Freeze & ring Pick Mr. Freeze up, place ring on arm. Mr. Freeze “I’ll climb to the top of the castle to wait for my cold cronies to help me escape!” Mr. Freeze Climb Mr. Freeze up steps on the left wall of the mansion Mr. Freeze Walk over to top right of castle Mr. Freeze “Now I’ll be able to see any silly hero coming here to try and stop me before they

see me!” Batcave playset “Ring, ring!” Batcave playset Pull yellow rail at the right of the Batcave playset to reveal Superman “An alarm at the Batcomputer, I’ll answer it!” Superman Pick up Superman from the ledge Superman Fly Superman down to the centre of the playset Superman Walk over to the Batcomputer “Someone has stolen the ring from the castle!” Superman “It must be the Mr. Freeze!” Superman “I’ll fly the Batcopter to the castle” Batcopter Fly Batcopter down to the middle of the Batcave playset Batcopter Spin propellers “Choak, Choak, Choak” Superman Walk Superman over to the Batcopter “Time to get in” Batcopter Open Batcopter roof Superman & Batcopter Pick Superman up, bend legs and sit him down into the Batcopter Batman “I’ll need the Bat-a-rang” Bat-a-rang Pick up Bat-a-rang from black alcove Bat-a-rang Put in Batcopter beside Superman Batcopter Close Batcopter roof Superman in the Batcopter

“To the castle!”

Superman in the Batcopter

“I must stop the Mr. Freeze!”

Batcopter Lift Batcopter into the air “Choak, choak, choak” Batcopter Spin propeller Superman in Batcopter Fly Batcopter to front of the castle Superman in Batcopter “I’ve arrived at the castle” Batcopter Open roof Bat-a-rang Pick Bat-a-rang out of the Batcopter Superman Pick Superman out of the Batcopter Superman & Bat-a-rang Pick up Bat-a-rang, put in Superman’s hand Superman “Now time to find the Mr. Freeze!” Superman Walk Superman to the window on the right, jump up to look in Superman “He’s not in here” Superman Walk Superman to the window on the left, jump up to look in Superman “He’s not in here either! Where is he?” Mr. Freeze “Oh no! That stupid Superman has shown up to stop me! I’ll have to take care of

him!” Mr. Freeze Jump Mr. Freeze down to the right hand side of mansion, facing

towards Superman

Superman Turn Superman to face Mr. Freeze Superman “Mr. Freeze! You’ll never get away with stealing the ring!” Mr. Freeze “You’re too late Superman! Ha, ha! Once I deal with you, I’ll be away scot-free!

Ha, ha, ha!” Superman “I don’t think so Mr. Freeze!” Superman & Bat-a-rang Pull Bat-a-rang off of Superman’s hand Superman “Take this!” Bat-a-rang Spin through air towards Mr. Freeze Bat-a-rang & Mr. Freeze Bat-a-rang hits Mr. Freeze and knocks him over Mr. Freeze “AHHH!” Mr. Freeze & ring Pull ring off Mr. Freeze Superman Walk Superman over to Mr. Freeze Superman & ring Put ring on Superman’s arm Superman “Remember Mr. Freeze, crime doesn’t pay!”


Appendix 7. 3 dimensional matrices with black shaded boxes indicating trained scripts


Appendix 8. 3 dimensional matrices with dark grey shaded boxes indicating possible emerging scripts in participant 1 alternative probes


Appendix 9. Scoring guidelines for bank scenario script

Bank Playset: Action Guidelines General Scoring rules

• Actions still count if a character/piece is placed somewhere and then falls off • Actions can occur out of order from the original script

Walk Joker to the white door Joker doesn’t have to contact ground when walking Open White door Door can be opened from front or back of the playset

Walk Joker to the black door Joker doesn’t have to contact ground when walking Open Black door Door can be opened from front or back of the playset

Walk Joker to vault door Joker doesn’t have to contact ground when walking

Climb Joker to the roof of the bank Joker & money may stand on the left or right of the bank. Money may or may not be on Joker’s arm but must be on bank roof

Slide yellow button to the right to open purple door revealing Batman

Batman must be on the other side of the purple door

Walk to the Batcomputer Batman doesn’t have to contact ground when walking Turn red circle beside middle blue door to

the right Do not score correct if Batmobile is not behind blue door

Walk Batman over to the Batmobile Batman may not contact ground when walking but must go to the Batmobile, not Batmobile to where Batman is

Put (Bat-a-rang) in Batmobile beside Batman

Still score correct even if participant does not retrieve from black alcove. May sit on top of Batman in Batmobile.

Drive Batmobile to front of the bank Batmobile can drive in straight line or side to side. Do not score correct if participant drives Batmobile but not to bank. Do not score if Batman is not in Batmobile.

Pick up Bat-a-rang, put on Batman’s hand Bat-a-rang must clip into Batman’s hand

Walk Batman to the white door Batman doesn’t have to contact ground when walking. Still score correct even if Bat-a-rang is not in Batman’s hand

Open White door Door can be opened from front or back of the playset

Walk Batman to the black door Batman doesn’t have to contact ground when walking. Still score correct even if Bat-a-rang is not in Batman’s hand

Open Black door Door can be opened from front or back of the playset Turn Batman to face Joker Still correct if Batman is already facing Joker

Pull Bat-a-rang off of Batman’s hand Bat-a-rang must already be in Batman’s hand

Spin (Bat-a-rang) through air towards Joker Still score correct if Bat-a-rang doesn’t spin

Pull money off Joker Still score correct if money falls off Joker’s hand when getting knocked over with Bat-a-rang

Walk Batman over to Joker Batman doesn’t have to contact ground when walking but must go to Joker, not Joker to where Batman is

Bank Playset: Vocal Guidelines General Scoring rules:

• Scored as + if it is complete and matches the script. • Scored as + if it is a partial vocal (at least 50%) or a paraphrase of a vocal (example: script says “Remember Joker, crime

doesn’t pay!” and student says “Crime doesn’t pay Joker!”) • Student does not have to be holding/manipulating character for + • Do not score as + if it is with the wrong character • Vocals are only counted once, but do not count against student if they repeat them • Scored as + if they occur out of order from the original script


Appendix 10. Scoring guidelines for mansion scenario script

Mansion Playset: Action Guidelines General Scoring rules


Walk Penguin to the window on the right Penguin doesn’t have to contact ground when walking Walk Penguin to the window on the left Penguin doesn’t have to contact ground when walking

Climb Penguin to the roof of the mansion Penguin & diamond may stand on the left or right of the bank. Diamond may or may not be on Penguin’s arm but must be on mansion roof

Turn red circle at the top right of the Batcave playset to raise the elevator

Robin must be in the elevator

Climb Robin down the purple ladder Robin touches purple ladder. Do not score correct if Robin Jumps down or flies down

Walk to the Batcomputer Robin doesn’t have to contact ground when walking. Score correct if Robin has directly climbed to Batcomputer

Walk Robin over to the Batcycle Robin may not contact ground when walking but must go to the Batcycle, not Batcycle to where Robin is

Put (Bat-a-rang) in Batcycle beside Robin Still score correct even if participant does not retrieve from black alcove

Drive Batcycle to front of the bank Batcycle can drive in straight line or side to side. Do not score correct if participant drives Batcycle but not to mansion. Do not score if Robin is not in Batcycle.

Pick up Bat-a-rang, put on Robin’s hand Bat-a-rang must clip into Robin’s hand

Walk Robin to the window on the right Robin doesn’t have to contact ground when walking. Still score correct even if Bat-a-rang is not in Robin’s hand

Walk Robin to the window on the left Robin doesn’t have to contact ground when walking. Still score correct even if Bat-a-rang is not in Robin’s hand

Turn Robin to face Penguin Still correct if Robin is already facing Penguin Pull Bat-a-rang off of Robin’s hand Bat-a-rang must already be in Robin’s hand

Spin (Bat-a-rang) through air towards Penguin

Still score correct if Bat-a-rang doesn’t spin

Pull diamond off Penguin Still score correct if diamond falls off Penguin’s hand when getting knocked over with Bat-a-rang

Walk Robin over to Penguin Robin doesn’t have to contact ground when walking but must go to Penguin, not Penguin to where Robin is Mansion Playset: Vocal Guidelines

General Scoring rules: • Scored as + if it is complete and matches the script. • Scored as + if it is a partial vocal (at least 50%) or a paraphrase of a vocal (example: script says “Remember Penguin,

crime doesn’t pay!” and student says “Crime doesn’t pay Penguin!”) • Student does not have to be holding/manipulating character for + • Do not score as + if it is with the wrong character • Vocals are only counted once, but do not count against student if they repeat them • Scored as + if they occur out of order from the original script


Appendix 11. Scoring guidelines for castle scenario script

Castle Playset: Action Guidelines General Scoring rules


Walk Mr. Freeze to the window on the right, jump to look in

Mr. Freeze doesn’t have to contact ground when walking

Walk Mr. Freeze to the window on the left, jump to look in


Walk Mr. Freeze to the green alcove at the left side of the castle


Climb Mr. Freeze up steps on the left wall of the castle

Mr. Freeze touches wall of the castle where steps are. Do not score correct if Mr. Freeze jumps up or flies up

Walk Mr. Freeze to the top right of the castle

Mr. Freeze doesn’t have to contact ground when walking. Ring may or may not be on Mr. Freeze’s arm but must be on castle roof

Pull yellow rail at the right of the Batcave playset to reveal Superman

Superman must be on the platform

Fly Superman down to the centre of the playset

Superman must fly down. Do not score correct if Superman uses the purple ladder to climb down. Score correct if Superman flies directly to Batcomputer.

Walk to the Batcomputer Superman doesn’t have to contact ground when walking. Score correct if Superman has directly flown to Batcomputer

Walk Superman over to the Batcopter Superman doesn’t have to contact ground when walking but must go to the Batcopter, not Batcopter to where Superman is

Put (Bat-a-rang) in Batcopter beside Superman

Still score correct even if participant does not retrieve from black alcove

Fly Batcopter to front of the castle Batcopter can fly in straight line or side to side. Do not score correct if participant flies Batcycle but not to castle. Do not score if Superman is not in Batcopter.

Pick up Bat-a-rang, put on Superman’s hand

Bat-a-rang must clip into Superman’s hand

Walk Superman to the window on the right, jump to look in

Superman doesn’t have to contact ground when walking. Still score correct even if Bat-a-rang is not in Superman’s hand

Walk Superman to the window on the left, jump to look in

Superman doesn’t have to contact ground when walking. Still score correct even if Bat-a-rang is not in Superman’s hand

Turn Superman to face Mr. Freeze Still correct if Superman is already facing Mr. Freeze Pull Bat-a-rang off of Superman’s hand Bat-a-rang must already be in Superman’s hand

Spin (Bat-a-rang) through air towards Mr. Freeze

Still score correct if Bat-a-rang doesn’t spin

Pull ring off Mr. Freeze Still score correct if ring falls off Mr. Freeze’s hand when getting knocked over with Bat-a-rang

Walk Superman over to Mr. Freeze Superman doesn’t have to contact ground when walking but must go to Mr. Freeze, not Mr. Freeze to where Superman is

Castle Playset: Vocal Guidelines General Scoring rules:

• Scored as + if it is complete and matches the script. • Scored as + if it is a partial vocal (at least 50%) or a paraphrase of a vocal (example: script says “Remember Mr. Freeze,

crime doesn’t pay!” and student says “Crime doesn’t pay Mr. Freeze!”) • Student does not have to be holding/manipulating character for + • Do not score as + if it is with the wrong character • Vocals are only counted once, but do not count against student if they repeat them • Scored as + if they occur out of order from the original script

Download - Video modeling and matrix training to teach pretend play in …... · 2019-02-13 · Video Modeling and Matrix Training 5 Abstract The purpose of this study was to combine video modeling

Top Related