Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
The Conditioning Of A Discriminative Stimulus Measured As An Orienting Reaction In Profoundly Retarded Blind Children
(USC Thesis Other)
The Conditioning Of A Discriminative Stimulus Measured As An Orienting Reaction In Profoundly Retarded Blind Children
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
This dissertation has been
microfilmed exactly as received 69-19,393
PORTER, William Harris, 1938-
THE CONDITIONING OF A DISCRIMINATIVE
STIMULUS MEASURED AS AN ORIENTING
REACTION IN PROFOUNDLY RETARDED
BLIND CHILDREN.
University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1969
Education, psychology
University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan
THE CONDITIONING OF A DISCRIMINATIVE STIMULUS
MEASURED AS AN ORIENTING REACTION IN
PROFOUNDLY RETARDED BLIND CHILDREN
by
William Harris Porter
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(Education)
January 1969
UNIVERSITY O F SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY PARK
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 9 0 0 0 7
This dissertation, written by
under the direction of hx$. Dissertation Com
mittee, and approved by all its -members, has
been presented to and accepted by the Graduate
School, in partial fulfillment of requirements
for the degree of
D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y
.W.UUam.Har.j:i.a.P£ir.tfix
Dean
Date January..29....I.9 .6 .9 .
DISSERTATION COMMITTEE
7 U s y K * h d h L ...
Chairman
Apparently offered freely, the favors
of the graduate school are like those of
a young girl; who, suddenly fearing her
honor, when approached is likely to scream.
— Munich, 1968
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES V
LIST OF FIGURES VX
Chapter
I. PROBLEM 1
Importance of the Problem
The Problem
The Purpose
The Hypotheses
Assumptions
Delimitations
Definitions of Terms
Organization of the Dissertation
Identifying the Blind Retarded
Evaluation
Prevalence of Blind Retarded Children
Behavioral Characteristics
Quasitheoretical Positions
Treatment Approaches
Implications for Research
The Orientation Reaction
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 22
III. METHODOLOGY 69
Subjects
Treatment Groups
Dependent Variables
iii
Chapter Page
Analysis of the Data
Significance Levels
IV. RESULTS............................. . .
Nonsense and Discriminative Stimuli
Comparison of Methods
Pretest to Posttest Comparison
Comparison of Subject Groups
V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND IMPLICATIONS . .
Summary
Conclusion and Implications
88
104
BIBLIOGRAPHY 115
LIST OP TABLES
Table Page
1. Analysis of Variance of Pretest Comparisons
of Nonsense and Discriminative Stimuli
for Experimental Groups ................. 90
2. Analysis of Variance of Posttest Comparisons
of Nonsense and Discriminative Stimuli
for Experimental Groups ................. 92
3. Three-way Analysis of Variance of GSR Scores 97
4. Analysis of Variance for the Performance
Variable (Trials to Criterion) Operantly
Conditioned Group ....................... 103
v
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Experimental Design of the Study.......... 13
2. Relationship of Subject to Apparatus .... 72
3. Operant Conditioning Paradigm ............ 74
4. Classical Conditioning Paradigm .......... 77
5. Interaction of Independent and Dependent
Variables................................ 79
6. Facsimile GSR Recording.................. 82
7. Order of Presentation of Taped Stimuli . . . 83
8. Pretest Difference in Response to Discrim
inative Stimuli (Sd) and Nonsense Stimuli
(N) by Conditioning Groups............... 94
9. Posttest Differences in Response to Discrim
inative Stimuli (Sd) and Nonsense Stimuli
(N) by- Conditioning Groups............... 95
10. The Interaction of the Methods and Pretest-
Posttest Variable ....................... 99
CHAPTER I
PROBLEM
As an outgrowth of the continuing interest in how
man learns, psychology has been experiencing a fresh new
emphasis that has thoroughly revitalized the behavioral
tree. In particular its effect has been felt strongly in
both the clinical and developmental branches. The impe
tus behind the movement can probably be attributed to
learning theory research of the past thirty years.
The present-day clinician can be contrasted with
the analytically-oriented psychologist, who saw the
individual largely as a product of his past history.
Today's clinician is likely to view the human organism as
an interrelated bundle of responses. These responses are
acted upon and react to a variety of stimuli, which may be
said to originate either inside the organism or in the
surrounding environment. Thus, the modern clinician will
be concerned, first, with present behavior and, second,
with past history.
Innovations in theory often have rumpled the com
posure of the adherents of some of the older psychological
schools. They have contended that the changes represent
only the revamping of the tenets of behaviorist psychol
ogists, such as Watson. It is true that there is some
similarity to behaviorist psychology because today's
learning theorists are still critically interested in
observed behavior. The old and the new differ, however,
in the kinds of observations that they consider to be
acceptable data. For the early behaviorists, behavior
meant the objectively visible and included only very
specific muscular and glandular responses. Today, learn
ing theorists still emphasize responses, but have added a
minute attention to the contingencies of reinforcement
that precede and follow a response. It is, for example,
a parent's response to the actions of the child that
represents the major force in shaping behavior (Lovaas,
et al., 1966). By the extension or withdrawal of specific
stimuli— which constitute reward or punishment— behavior
is gradually molded into a form that is socially accept
able.
The subtle contingencies upon which reward and
punishment hinge are learned quickly by the normal child.
If these stimuli are not discriminated, they do not take
on meaning and the child fails to learn. The child who
is not affected by parental approval or disapproval will
behave abnormally and conceivably show little if any
social or intellectual development {Bijou 6 Baer, 1961).
Children who do not respond to parental approval,
or who respond inconsistently, have received increasing
attention from clinicians who would try to modify behav
ior. Consequently, the operant conditioning approach,
as it is sometimes called, has been used with many groups
of abnormal children in some very creative applications.
Many techniques remain untried, however, and this is
particularly true among multiply-handicapped children.
It is the purpose of this paper to explore some of the
applications of operant conditioning as they apply to the
multiple handicapped— and specifically to the profoundly
retarded blind child.
Importance of the Problem
For at least twenty years authorities in the
field of special education (Cruickshank & Johnson, 1958;
Dunn, 1963; Massachusetts Special Unpaid Commission, 1946)
have been affirming that the number of multiply-handicapped
children is increasing. This view has been expressed
recently by Dunn (1963), who felt that advances in medical
science are responsible for the increase, and noted that
diseases such as poliomyelitis, which would previously
have been handicapping, are now controlled. Conversely,
new medical developments are saving children who might
not have survived before, but these children are exhibit
ing multiple handicaps.
The term multiple handicap or multihandicap
(Cruickshank & Johnson, 1958) refers to the presence of
more than one type of exceptionality at one time.
Cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and mental retardation are
frequently seen together, as are emotional problems with
concomitants in other exceptionalities. The largest
group of multiple-handicapped children is characterized
by mental retardation in relation to some other physical
disability.
This study was specifically concerned with chil
dren who are either partially sighted or totally blind,
and in addition who are diagnosed as profoundly retarded.
More often than not such children are simply labeled
"retarded blind" or "blind retarded," depending upon the
agency that is considering the child. According to
5
Fraenkel (1964) , the multiply-handicapped child— and the
retarded blind in particular— is in a "socialized no man’s
land [p. 167]." Too often he is pushed back and forth
■
between agencies with little hope of service. As Fraenkel
stated:
It is clear that, if anything, such persons
receive numerous referrals but limited services;
. . . agencies primarily serving the blind may
indicate lukewarm interest in a client who is
thought to be mentally retarded. The reverse
situation can prevail in agencies primarily
interested in the mentally retarded who suspect
blindftess is present as well. Unfortunately,
the same person may be involved in both in
stances [p. 166] .
The plight of the blind retarded child, including
both his placement and his treatment, is reflected in
the professional literature. A survey of the literature
on mental retardation, completed by Boly and DeLeo in
1956, indicated that references pertaining to the visu
ally impaired were almost nonexistent. Anderson (1965)
stated that a survey of the American Journal of Mental
Deficiency revealed only two articles on the retarded
blind during the ten years preceding 1956. Anderson's
own bibliography, published in 1965, contains slightly
over 100 references. Finally, the monumental Bibliography
of World Literature on Mental Retardation (Heber, 1962)
includes more than 16,000 references, but less than 30
of these are related to the visually impaired mentally
retarded.
It is thus evident that very little research has
dealt with the multiply-handicapped blind child. This is
perhaps understandable when it is realized that the group
does not represent a sizable segment of the school or
hospital population, nor does it supply the most conven
ient research subjects. Since, however, these children
are being seen in larger numbers, they place a greater
burden on those who are responsible for their training.
The Problem
The profoundly retarded blind child presents a
unique challenge to the application of learning theory
because of his severe behavioral manifestations. A domi
nant characteristic of these children is their unrespon
siveness to environmental stimuli, particularly to the
overtures of other people. Therefore, to establish a
stimulus as a discriminant, it must be made the discrim
inative stimulus for the primary reinforcer before its
reinforcing qualities can be used. This is consistent
with Dinsraoor*s hypothesis (1950), which stated that a
stimulus will take on reinforcing qualities only to the
extent that the subject can discriminate the stimulus as
a necessary concomitant for reinforcement. The rationale
underlying this hypothesis was stated by Bernal (1965) :
. . . if a child cannot selectively attend
to, or orient toward, a stimulus, the pairing of
a biologically important event with that stimu
lus will not result in its taking on reinforcing
properties; nor will the child learn the fine
discriminations that set the occasion for appro
priate behavior (p. 1].
After conditioning has taken place, however, and
the discriminative stimulus has been learned, it is the
contention of this researcher that the subject will attend
or orient to it and the discriminative stimulus (Sd) can
then be measured by means of an orienting reaction (OR).
The orienting reaction has been broadly defined
as ". . .a widespread and complex process with central
and peripheral components that is evoked by any change
in stimulation"[Maltzman 6 Raskin, 1965, p. 2], Justifi
cation for the use of the orienting reaction is found in
the literature on classical conditioning, where Maltzman
(1965) makes the point that unless an organism orients
toward the conditioned stimulus, learning has failed to
occur.
Bernal (1965) supplied similar information based
8
on operant conditioning. She presented data for one
subject who, at first, gave no OR as measured by the
galvanic skin response (GSR), but who later showed siz
able gains following conditioning. The study was to be
verified with a larger group, but she said of this case:
The second (post-GSR) data collection . . .
yielded striking information which, if verified
in other Ss under similar conditions, would im
ply that significant neurophysical changes may
be correlated with the behavioral changes ef
fected by the operant training . . . such con
centrated training may well lead to the estab
lishment of central nervous system functioning
Ip. 6] .
Finally, Nies (1964) summarized data to show how
the OR can be given permanent signal value (learned):
One of the basic characteristics of the OR
is its susceptibility to extinction. . . . How
ever, if the stimulus is given value, the OR
becomes especially resistent to extinction.
. . . A stimulus may be given signal value by
pairing it with a biologically important event
such as food or pain (Razran, 1961), by imposing
a discrimination upon the S (Sokolov, 1960), or
by requiring the S to perform an instrumental
response to stimulus (Maruszewski, 1957; Luria
& Vinogradova, 1959) [1964, p. 29].
It has been noted earlier that learning will not
take place if a child cannot, or does not, discriminate
meaningful stimuli. It also has been stated that con
stant presentation (preadaptation) of a stimulus that has
not taken on meaning will result in its extinction,
preclude the elicitation of an orienting reaction, and
retard further learning (Maltzman & Raskin, 1965, p. 2).
Observations have shown that the profoundly
retarded blind child fails to attend to almost all exter
nal stimuli (Ball & Porter, 1967; Guess, 1967). It can
then be hypothesized that the blind retardate's name, by
reason of his unresponsiveness, has been preadapted or
generalized into the environment— it is a neutral stimu
lus. The name must, therefore, be made a stimulus to
which he will orient; that is, it must be given the
qualities of a discriminative stimulus or he will not
begin to learn.
The Purpose
The purpose of the study was to demonstrate that
it is possible to condition profoundly retarded blind
children to an orienting reaction to a specific stimulus.
The study was designed to take a stimulus to which the
children did not respond outwardly (i.e., their names)
and, through its association with a primary reinforcer
(i.e., food), condition them to discriminate that stimu
lus.
To insure that the stimulus would be discriminated,
all three of the requirements for establishing the per-
mancy of the OR (Nies, 1964) were met in the research
design: (1) the stimulus was given signal value by pair
ing it with food; (2) the subject was required to dis
criminate the stimulus; and (3) the subject was required
to perform an instrumental response as evidence of dis
crimination. It was hypothesized that by meeting these
criteria a more permanent and stable orienting reaction
could be established. This in turn would bring the sub
jects into closer contact with the environment, increase
attention, and facilitate further learning (Maltzman &
Raskin, 1965).
The child's name was chosen because research
(Ball, 1967; Bensberg, 1965) indicated that the name
should be the focal point of training programs with the
retarded. Observations had shown that these children
neither came when called nor showed any sign of having
heard their name. It was not possible, therefore, to
gain their attention by using their name, and if other
more appropriate behaviors were to be instituted (e.g.,
learning of dressing skills, self-feeding, or toileting),
a means of control had to be established. Teaching of
the name afforded a natural starting point to gain that
11
control. It also offered the prospect that further
training might thus be possible.
The most realistic comparison of the subjects
appeared to be on the basis of the degree of sightedness
(i.e., blind or partially sighted). If differences were
found between the groups, it would be indicated that the
degree of sightedness was a significant factor affecting
performance. This was, in fact, expected but definitive
knowledge would be an aid in planning training programs
for the blind retardate. Large differences in performance
would suggest that programs for the sighted should not
attempt to be adapted to the blind, but that new tech
niques must be devised.
The Hypotheses
General Hypothesis
The general hypothesis of this study was that
attention, as measured by an orienting reaction, could be
conditioned in profoundly retarded blind children. This
hypothesis was of a general nature and was not specifi
cally tested, but served as a theoretical basis for the
formation of the research hypotheses. The following very
12
brief overview of the research design is intended to help
clarify the research hypotheses (details of the design
are presented in Chapter III).
The initial assumption of the study was that
operant conditioning would be the most satisfactory way
to change behavior. The study compared two methods of
conditioning, operant and classical, with the latter
acting as a control group. In order to control as many
variables as possible, the subjects were divided on the
basis of sightedness into blind and. partially-sighted
groups. The effectiveness of conditioning was measured
by comparing the subjects' responses to the discrimina
tive (trained) stimuli and to nonsense stimuli. These
stimuli were presented on tape and the subjects' recogni
tion measured as an orienting reaction. The OR was
recorded physiologically as the galvanic skin response
(GSR), which served as the dependent variable. The design
of the study may be substantially represented as shown in
Figure 1.
Specific Research Hypotheses
The research hypotheses were derived from the
design in Figure 1. They were organized first to test
13
Subjects
la
Totally
Blind
lb
Partially
Sighted
2a
Operant
Conditioning
Treatment
2b
Classical
Conditioning
Fig. 1. Experimental design of the study.
{Hypothesis I) whether the subjects' responses to the two
types of stimuli (nonsense and discriminative) were the
same at the beginning of the study,-a fact which could
not be assumed at the outset of the study. Hypothesis II
tested whether the responses to the two types of stimuli
were different after conditioning was complete. The
response to the trained stimulus was naturally hypothe
sized to be greater than to the nonsense stimulus.
Hypotheses III and IV predicted a significant increase in
subject responsiveness to the trained stimulus over the
course of the experiment for both the operantly conditioned
and the partially sighted subjects. The final hypothesis
(V) was a test of the behavioral dependent variable. It
measured the number of trials needed by the operantly
conditioned group to achieve optimal conditioning.
Research Hypothesis I. The responses to the
discriminative and to the nonsense stimuli will not differ
significantly among any of the groups on the pretest as
measured by the dependent variable (GSR).
Research Hypothesis II. The responses to the
discriminative and nonsense stimuli will differ signifi
cantly only for the operant group on the posttest as
15
measured by the dependent variable {GSR).
Research Hypothesis III. The pre- to posttest
increase to the discriminative stimulus of the operantly
conditioned group will be significantly larger than that
of the classically conditioned group as measured by the
dependent variable (GSR).
Research Hypothesis IV. The pre- to posttest
increase to the discriminative stimulus of the partially
sighted subjects will be significantly larger than that
of the totally blind subjects as measured by the dependent
variable (GSR).
Research Hypothesis V. The partially sighted
subjects will have a significantly lower number of mean
trials on the behavioral dependent variable (TC).
Assumptions
It was assumed that the profoundly retarded blind
child would respond to both operant and classical methods
of conditioning. It was further assumed, on the basis of
reports by other investigators (Bernal, 1965; Stone,
1964) , that physiological measures could be used
16
successfully with this type of subject. It was assumed
that the criterion of conditioning was a valid measure,
the justification for the criterion being taken from the
work of Zimmerman (1959). Finally, it was assumed that
the log conductance transformation as discussed by Hag
gard (1949), Lacy and Siegel (1949), and Woodworth and
Schlosberg (1954) was the most accurate way to handle the
data.
The methods and results of the study can logi
cally be generalized to other visually-impaired retarded
populations. It is assumed that the use of the OR to
measure attention, if the specific nature of the popula
tion is respected, could be generalized to other multi
handicapped groups. Likewise, the use of these and
similar operant techniques may be adapted to other groups.
Delimitations
The results should not be generalized beyond
profoundly retarded and partially sighted subjects such
as were used in this research. Any analysis of the GSR
data should consider the instrumentation by which the data
were collected, and the methods by which the scores were
transformed. A minor limitation in the design of the
17
study occurred when two of the subjects had to be dropped
as a result of illness.
Definitions of Terms
Classical conditioning.
. . . the complex of organismic processes
involved in the experimental procedure, or in
the procedure itself, wherein two stimuli are
presented in close temporal proximity. One of
them has a reflex or previously acquired connec
tion with a certain response, whereas the other
is not an adequate stimulus to the response in
question. Consequent upon such paired presenta
tion of the two stimuli, usually many times
repeated, the second stimulus acquires the
potentiality of evoking a response very like the
response provoked by the other stimulus [English
& English, 1958, p. 106].
Discriminative stimulus (Sd).
. . . any stimuli which marks a time or place
of reinforcement, positive or negative, being
presented or removed, is known as a discrimina
tive stimulus [Bijou & Baer, 1961, pp. 48-49].
For the purpose of this research, the discrimina
tive stimulus was operationally defined as a subject's
instrumental response to his own name.
Galvanic skin response (GSR). In its most pre
cise form, this phenomenon is defined as an electrodermal
response.
The term [galvanic skin response] applies
either to the apparent resistance of the skin
18
to the passage of a weak external current (Fer£
phenomenon) or to the production by the body of
a weak current [Venables & Martin, 1967, p. 174].
The GSR was operationally defined as any deflec
tion on the oscillograph of at least 200 ohms in magnitude,
and occurring between 1.5 and 3.5 seconds after the input
of a stimulus.
Neutral stimulus. In this investigation, a neu
tral stimulus was defined as one that elicited no orient
ing reaction from the subject, either observationally
through an instrumental response or physiologically by an
electrodermal response (GSR).
Operant conditioning. Operant conditioning was
defined as a method of modifying behavior, which involves
a change in the strength of the response, by varying the
reinforcers that are contingent upon the response.
Orienting reaction (OR). The definition that
completely describes the orienting reaction as it was used
in this study was taken from Berlyne (I960). He identi
fied it as exploratory behavior consisting of:
. . . changes in posture, in the orientation
of sense organs, or in the state of the sense
organs, . . . [p. 79) that can be elicited by
the onset, termination, intensification,
19
weakening, or modification in any other way of
any kind of stimulation [p. 81] .
Profoundly retarded. The profoundly retarded
in this study were those subjects who had a diagnosed
intelligence quotient of twenty or less, and who exhibited
a severe lack of motor development.
Partially sighted. Partial sightedness was de
fined as a subcategory of visual impairment. In this
study, the term distinguishes those subjects who receive
some visual stimuli from those who receive none at all.
Reinforcer. A reinforcer was defined as a condi
tion which, when presented immediately contingent upon a
certain act, increases the probability that the act will
be repeated. For the purposes of this study specific
reinforcers were limited to the food served with the
child's meal.
Totally blind. Total blindness as used in this
study was analogous to absolute blindness. Absolute
blindness means:
. . . entire lack of visual perception. The
criterion for this classification is inability
to recognize even strong light, when shone
directly into the eye [Bauman & Hayes, 1951,
p. 13].
Organization of the Dissertation
Chapter I has presented the introduction to the
problem, set forth its importance, and discussed its
specific implications. The hypotheses tested and the
assumptions and delimitations of the study were also
given. The terms used in the research have been defined
and the organization of the study outlined.
Chapter II consisted of a detailed review of the
literature on the profoundly retarded blind child. This
review included some background on the orienting response
its implications as an indicator of attention, and its
specific applications to exceptional children.
Chapter III presented a description of the meth
odology of the experiment. It included a description of
the research model, an analysis of the population, and an
elaboration of the conditioning paradigm. This chapter
also discussed the hypotheses, levels of significance,
and the statistics used to test the hypotheses.
Chapter IV set forth the results of the research
in relation to the hypotheses. The application of the
analysis of variance was discussed in terms of the re
search findings considered against the confidence limits.
Chapter V summarized the findings of the research
and presented applications and implications that seemed
pertinent to future study.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Almost fifty years ago a book by T. D. Cutsforth
(1951 reprint), The Blind in School and Society, changed
the entire course of education for the blind. At that
time the idea that the blind were entitled to manual and
academic training equivalent to that offered sighted
children was just beginning to be accepted. It was
Cutsforth's thesis, however, that the most important
aspect of training for the blind was social and emotional
development. Because there was so little room for the
social deviate in a fast-changing world, he felt the
blind must first learn to fit into society.
One hundred years ago the blind could be "as
queer as Dick's hatband" and still get along.
The blind need a program of social integration
and not a push into braille [Cutsforth, 1951,
p. 2].
If one were to reread that work today with the
benefit of recent personality research, much of its
22
23
revolutionary character might be overlooked. Neverthe
less, its impact is not missing from current literature.
Quoting from the "Creed for Exceptional Children," Rigby
(1963) stated that all blind children should have the
opportunity for normal development.
First [they need] . . . a sense of security
and belonging, to love and be loved, and a
sense of achievement and success. . . . All
the things essential to normal growth and devel
opment [p. 97].
According to DiMichael (1956), M. . .we have
become aware of the frequent appearance of deeper emo
tional difficulties in the retarded blind [p. 18].1 1 Among
the more important aspects to attempt to achieve a more
complete development of the retarded blind child, as
discussed in the literature, are social casework with
parents (Moor, 1961), individual psychotherapy (Elonen,
1967), the development of social skills (Strickland,
1950), and even mobility training (Seelye, 1966) . It is
immediately obvious that anticipated program needs for
the retarded blind are keeping pace with those in other
areas of special education.
The need for expanded programs, along with the
increasing numbers of multihandicapped children, has
resulted in a greater shortage of adequate educational
24
facilities. A recent analysis by the National Associa
tion for Retarded Children (1960) across selected states
indicated that not more than one in four exceptional
children of all types were receiving the education they
required.
Considering the mentally retarded blind specifi
cally, a survey of 61 institutions for the retarded found
only 25 teachers working with the retarded blind. Only a
fraction of these teachers (a ratio of one to every 193
children) was certified in their respective states.
Furthermore, not one institution was carrying on research
related to the retarded with multiple handicaps (Guess,
1967). Reports by the American Printing House for the
Blind (1955), the American Foundation for the Blind (1960),
Boly and DeLeo (1956), and others have indicated similarly
inadequate programs.
Root (1963) noted that programs for the multi
handicapped blind were not available in New York in ade
quate quantity or geographical locations. She stressed
that no state or region could claim to have solved the
problem, for no matter how many resources were available,
they were never utilized as knowledgeably or extensively
as they should have been. Because the number of blind
25
children in most communities was rather small, the
development of local programs had not been feasible in
any but the largest cities.
Anent the lack of facilities and research,
DiMichael (1956) observed:
It would be simple to give the retarded
blind the kiss of death by saying that we lack
the sure data of scientifically valid research;
therefore, we can discuss nothing with certain
ty, nor can we do anything constructive and
valuable [p. 15].
Commenting that beyond blindness and retardation,
which are of sufficient magnitude as to require extra
skill and knowledge from those who would attempt to help
them, Fraenkel (1964) noted that another factor is
involved:
In one sense a reverse synergism appears to
be operating. At best a negative form of syner
gism is present. Instead of an added positive
factor created by the merging of two separate
forces or conditions, there is created a third
negative valence or force that often is greater
than the two other disabilities [p. 165].
Thus the blind retarded child is often excluded
from training and education. All too often in the insti
tution he is confined to sterile, overprotective, and
unstimulating surroundings. Instead of ignoring these
children, it is the contention of Guess (1967) that a
26
great deal can be gained from the study of ". . . this
relatively unexplored dyad [p. 471]." In the child with
two primary learning deficits, one sees not only an organ
ism cut off from the environment sensorily, but also one
that is unable to integrate those meager sensations that
it does receive. The study of such a child should pro
vide a better understanding of the retarded and the blind,
as well as giving some insight into the pathological be
havior that results from environmental and stimulus
deprivation.
Identifying the Blind Retarded
The identification of the multiple-handicapped
blind child is.a complex and involved process, and some
writers feel that it is a mistake to look for a single
syndrome. Characteristic of most opinions is Donlon's
(1964) statement that "There is no 'typical* multiple-
handicapped child; there are just too many variables
involved [p. 76]." A total evaluation is necessary,
according to Donlon, and this implies an assessment of
functional level and a prediction of the maximal level to
be achieved. A single intelligence score is not valu
able.
27
It takes time to achieve such "total" informa
tion, and there is great variation of opinion about how
to get the data (Moor, 1961) . Some children are evalu
ated on the basis of one appointment, while others are
seen in a residential setting for up to ten days. Moor
noted that some authorities take as long as six months
before the attempt at appraisal is made.
Some writers are more categorical (eg., DiMichael,
1956). They feel that, since the communication of ideas
about the retarded blind child relies so heavily on how
he is identified, it is imperative that firm guidelines
be established. The main problem is not the identifica
tion of blindness but the understanding of exactly what
retardation is.
Other writers (Bauman 6 Hayes, 1951; Moor, 1961)
consider the ocular report of special significance,
particularly the cause and length of blindness, the age
of onset, and the amount of present visual acuity. It
is important to recognize that the term "blindness" is
used to describe a number of people who possess some
*
slight vision. This includes the categories of blindness,
light perception, and motion perception, which are
defined as;
28
Absolute blindness . . . entire lack of
visual perception. The criterion for this
classification is inability to recognize even
strong light when shone directly into the eye.
Light perception . . . covers visual percep
tion ranging from ability to distinguish strong
light up to but not including ability to detect
movement of the hand held at a distance of three
feet from the eye.
Motion perception . . . recognition of mo
tion at a distance of three feet from the eye at
the lower limit up to but not including a meas
urement of 5/200 on the Snellen chart [Bauman &
Hayes, 1951, p. 13).
The American Medical Association defines 5/200 as
equivalent to 99.9 per cent of full visual efficiency.
"Traveling sight" is rated between 5/200 and 10/200 or
the ability to see at five feet what people with normal
vision see at ten feet. The commonly accepted level of
legal blindness is 20/200 as it constitutes eligibility
for federal assistance and represents twenty per cent of
retained efficiency (Bauman & Hayes, 1951, pp. 12, 13).
Thus, the diagnosis of blindness is the result of
a relatively straightforward physical measurement, except
that the identification of the degree of blindness may be
more involved with the profoundly retarded or the emo
tionally disturbed. The definition and identification of
retardation, on the other hand, is extremely complex, and
unfortunately it depends to a large extent on the
29
professional viewpoint of the individual conducting the
evaluation. DiMichael (1956) said:
Workers for the blind may state easily that
blindness covers those with vision of 20/200 or
less, or those with a limited range of vision
with a diameter of 20 degrees at its widest
point. . . . The basic definition of mental
retardation is complex. The definition depends
upon the professional viewpoint . . . and may be
stated somewhat differently by the medical,
psychological, social, or educational worker
[p. 16].
It should be pointed out that both diagnoses may become
gross estimates in the evaluation of a child who does not
communicate verbally, such as the retarded blind.
The psychologist is the one most often called
upon to make the diagnosis, but he will seldom do this
without the benefit of medical and social consultation.
Speaking for the psychologist, DiMichael (1956) defined
mental retardation as:
. . . a condition of complete or arrested
mental development due to genetic factors or
physical causes before, during, or after birth
which places the individual at a substantial
handicap in learning as compared to average or
normal persons [p. 16].
Such a clear-cut statement is alarmingly simple when con
sidering its application to the individual child who is
deceptive in appearance and whose performance belies his
true potential. The task becomes doubly difficult when
30
the child must be placed in one of the subcategories—
edueable, trainable, or custodial--that have been worked
out within the definition of the intelligence quotient.
Evaluation
As early as 1915 Irwin suggested that the blind
subnormal child should be given training suitable to his
mental age. This came at a time when intelligence testing
was still in its infancy. Today anyone well versed in
mental retardation would agree that the IQ or mental age
is not a satisfactory way to classify children. Measure
ment and assessment instruments for the blind are acknow
ledged to be especially inadequate (Hepfinger, 1962;
Root, 1963; Scholl, 1950).
Guess (1967) has pointed out three problems in
the assessment of the blind retardate, the most important
of which he regards as the lack of instrumentation:
. . . only the Hayes-Binet Intelligence
Test for the Blind has been standardized on
blind children. Moreover, the highly verbal
nature of [it] seriously limits its use with many
blind retarded since they are often nonverbal
or only partly verbal [p. 472].
Another problem is that behavioral observations of the
blind child are often distorted by the theoretical posi
tion framework of the observer. Guess's third problem
31
is the confounding of judgments by additional handicaps
such as emotional problems, seizures, deafness, or speech
impairment.
Davis (1962) critiqued a number of tests in common
use with the blind, among which are the Wechsler Scales,
the Hayes-Binet, and the Wechsler-Bellvue. Special tests
include the Blind Learning Aptitude Test (BLAT), which
measures tactile perception, and the Haptic Intelligence
Scale (HIS), which is a special performance test, purport
ing to measure fine tactile discrimination. Also men
tioned was Anderson's adaptation of the Raven Progressive
Matrices for the blind, and Davis' own revision of the
1960 Binet scale.
Although much work is being done toward better
measurement and assessment instruments'^or the’ blind,
Henderson (1960) found no test designed to measure the
intelligence of children with multiple handicaps such as
the blind retarded. Retarded children may have different
capacities and limitations even though they obtain the
same test scores. Some may be socially mature, have good
muscular coordination, or possess unusual verbal ability
but still be classed in the IQ group of retarded children
(Scholl, 1950). This has led some writers (Curtis, 1966;
32
Hallenbeck, 1954) to encourage the examiner not to probe
for liabilities, but to seek out and enlarge the child's
capabilities. They suggest a social maturity scale such
as the Maxfield-Fjeld as a more usable assessment instru
ment.
Nonetheless, in many practical applications, most
workers are still guided by the intelligence quotient
although those who deal most closely with such children
caution against it.
When classifying the retarded child, if one does
use the intelligent quotient, he leaves himself open to
obvious criticism on several counts: (1) the statistical
rigidness of using the IQ alone? (2) the fact that the
diagnosis of mental retardation relies heavily on a clin
ical judgment? and (3) the uncertainty of making a prog
nosis about the relationship of mental ability and one's
expected role in life. The use of multidisciplinary
teams in evaluating a child in conjunction with the pru
dent use of test results will ordinarily overcome the
first and second objections. Point 3, however, presents
problems that cannot be overcome easily with the current
research available. There are practically no follow-up
studies on the retarded blind after training.
33
Because of these diagnostic problems it has often
been found that blind children
. . . are baffling to professional persons.
Many of these children have been diagnosed as
"damaged," "psychotic," "schizophrenic," etc.
Some of these children of school age have al
ready been dropped from educational programs of
various types and are now appearing in programs
for disturbed children. All are retarded [Moor,
1959, p. 20].
Consequently, the problems of differential diagnosis com
plicate not only prevalence estimates but treatment con
siderations as well.
Prevalence of Blind Retarded Children
Some of the most recent statistics on the preva
lence of blindness are reported by the National Society
for the Prevention of Blindness (1966). According to
their figures, legal blindness in the United States as of
July 1, 1965, was in excess of 416,400 persons. The
greater number of blind persons were in the Eastern and
Southern states, reflecting the nonwhite and older popu
lations. Among school children, one out of four, or
approximately 12,000,000, are in need of eye care, with
10 per cent of these in California.
The National Society for the Prevention of Blind
ness study made a semantic distinction between prevalence
34
and incidence. In that report, incidence refers to the
number of new cases occurring over a period of time as in
a given year, and prevalence represents the total number
of cases in the population at any given time, usually
taken at the end of a calendar year. Estimates of the
number of retarded blind presented in this paper are
estimates of prevalence only, to the extent that they are
surveys by individuals or institutions at a given time;
they do not follow an annual pattern.
A survey by the National Association for Retarded
Children (1960) incorporated 150 replies representing 37
states. Cumulative figures were not reported because the
returns showed no relationship to the populations of the
respective states. The following is an example:
Virginia with a population of over 3,000,000
quoted a figure of about 200 [retarded blind),
whereas Louisiana with a population of over
2,500,000 indicated that there were twelve known
cases in that state [p. 40].
Of the units surveyed, 41 reported that among their blind
population there were no retarded students. The editors
commented that it is not surprising to discover vast
unmet needs with reference to the education of the men
tally retarded blind (p. 44).
Two frequently cited prevalence estimates
35
(Charney, 19 60; DiMichael, 1956} placed the cumulative
number of school-age blind children (5 to 17 years)
between 7,000 and 16,000. By extrapolating percentages
of the normal curve, a figure is derived of between 1,750
and 4,000 blind children with IQs below 80.
A survey by Long and Perry (1956) of 51 schools
and institutions for the blind or retarded indicated at
least 1,000 children enrolled in these schools with IQs
of 80 or less. These data excluded the Royer-Greaves
School in Pennsylvania and the Fernald School in Massa
chusetts, which are the two largest and might bring the
total number up to 1,500.
Figures reported in percentages include a survey
by Paraskove (1959) that revealed about 15 per cent of the
students in 29 resident schools for the blind were re
tarded. DiMichael (1956) placed the number at from 10 to
15 per cent, while a survey by the American Printing House
for the Blind (1955) indicated that among children in
residential schools for the blind 7.9 per cent were re
tarded .
Interestingly enough, these figures compare
closely with a detailed survey by Cawley and Spotts (1967),
who found 1,458 blind and partially sighted children
36
between 3 and 15 years of age. Their survey covered
30.000 children in 61 state and private schools for the
retarded. They concluded that the blind and partially
sighted constitute about 5 per cent of the population in
today's residential schools for the retarded.
These findings compare to a 4 per cent figure
obtained by Walsh (1963) at the Rosewood Training School
among patients who were blind or near blind. An unpub
lished tabulation by Rebish (1965) found approximately 6
per cent of the total population at Pacific State Hospi
tal, Pomona, California, to be blind or partially sighted.
No incidence study of the retarded blind was
located in the literature, although in some ways this
statistic would be more valuable than figures on preva
lence. It could serve as a guide to better program plan
ning. A rough estimate can be obtained, however, based
on the incidence of legal blindness reported in the
National Society for the Prevention of Blindness study
(1966). That report stated that there are approximately
30.000 new cases of blindness every year, of which 16
per cent (4,800) are due to prenatal influences. By
utilizing the Cawley and Spotts (1967) figure of 5 per
cent retardation in blind children, simple mathematics
37
would indicate that out of 4,800 new cases, well over 200
per year would be blind retarded.
The disparity observed in prevalence figures
indicates that estimates of the blind retarded are lower
in institutions for the retarded than in facilities for
the blind. This may reflect the difficulty in assessing
blindness among retardates, or it may be an indication of
the heavy emphasis on academic achievement in schools for
the blind.
Behavioral Characteristics
The behavior of the blind retarded child is most
often likened to that of the autistic child, because both
are unresponsive to their environment, particularly to
the overtures of other people. In the opinion of some
investigators (Berkson & Davenport, 1962; Guess, 1967),
their "autistic-like" withdrawal is brought on by self
stimulatory behavior that produces an altered level of
consciousness. The lack of external stimuli received,
coupled with the children's retarded ability to discrim
inate meaningful stimuli, apparently combine to shut them
off from their environment. Maltzman commented;
. . . OR's to external stimuli may not
occur because of inhibition produced by
38
excessive orientation to internal stimuli
[Maltzman & Raskin, 1965, p. 14].
Learning is based on the way one reacts to
stimuli and the contingencies of reinforcement that sur
round them.
. . . there are many stimuli which precede
and control our behaviors . . . because they
promise various types of reinforcements as con
sequences of certain operants. Let us give such
stimuli a name: any stimulus which marks a time
or place of reinforcement, positive or negative,
being presented or removed, is known as a dis
criminative stimulus [Bijou & Baer, 1961, pp.
48-49] .
Guess (1967) made the point, however, that the
blind retarded demonstrate more intragroup differences
than commonalities. The child's development is dependent
upon the relative severity of each of his disabilities
and its relation to cognitive and emotional growth. The
following specific behavioral deficits have been identi
fied.
Speech Development
The lack of verbal communication that the blind
child experiences is, according to Green and Schecter
(1957), the most detrimental factor influencing normal
development. Although blindness is not entirely
responsible for the child's withdrawal, the more retarded
the child the more likely it is that he will be nonverbal
or partially verbal. When speech does exist, it is often
echolalic, perserverative, or full of nonsense verbalisms.
This type of aberration greatly concerns educators and
parents, but at least one writer (Dokecki, 1966) felt
that such concern was not well founded. He noted that
there is no empirical evidence to suggest that the non
sense language of the blind will lead to a disruption of
the thinking process. But from a psycholinguistic point
of view, he pointed out, it may be an important factor
in further education. At the same time it should be
noted that delayed or abnormal speech is not uncommon
among sighted retardates (Goertzen, 1957) and normal
blind children (Miner, 1963; Stichfield, 1928).
Sensory Motor Development
The sensory-motor development of the retarded
blind child, an apparent victim of overprotection and
understimulation, is often characterized by a conspicuous
developmental lag. He is often weak and flaccid. A
lack of gross motor coordination produces an awkward,
cautious walk, with seemingly aimless movements of the
40
arms and legs. His mobility also reflects his insecurity.
On the other hand, some children exhibit a tense
ness suggestive of spasticity, and many blind children are
described as "slightly palsied." Despite this, Moor
(1961) pointed out that fine motor coordination or manual
dexterity may be well developed. This inconsistent motor
development has been considered by Elonen and Zwaren-
steyn (1964) and attributed to a lack of opportunity for
normal development. It has, however, also been noted in
normal blind children (Buell, 1950) .
The motor development of the blind child is cru
cial to the achievement of personal mobility. Training
in orientation and travel are two of the most important
aspects of the retarded blind child’s education (Scholl,
19 50), and for this reason he must be given the oppor
tunity to develop good health and physical fitness.
Other researchers (Fraenkel, 19 64; Seelye & Thomas, 1966)
have pointed out that this aspect of training is tied to
a sense of personal dignity, and will be the basis of a
feeling of independence in the home and community. If a
child does not feel that he can care for himself, it may
stifle the development of other skills.
41
Autoerotic Behaviors
Gruber and Moor (19 63) discussed some of the
characteristics of the multihandicapped blind child in a
chapter entitled "Who Is This Blind Child?" They de
scribed him as a pale and listless child, with poor
muscle tone and unsatisfactory mobility. He may be
silent or may fill his environment with meaningless noises.
His behavior may include any number of atavisms from head
banging to biting, or he may withdraw and wait for the
world to come to him. Often he will resist people to the
point of seeming to be, catatonic or by crying out hys
terically when touched. These are some of the factors
that cause the child to be diagnosed as "schizophrenic."
The unusual behaviors manifested by the blind child are
often labeled "blindisms," an unfortunate term because it
suggests that blindness is the primary cause of the "man
nerism." These writers believed that mannerisms, such as
eye rubbing, rocking, and head banging, are not inevitable
accompaniments of blindness. Rather, as they stated:
To attribute these activities primarily to
blindness is to misunderstand their significance
as well as to make the reaching of a sound theory
of treatment more difficult [Gruber & Moor, 1963,
p. 19] .
42
A series of studies have demonstrated that "blind-
isms," or “stereotyping mannerisms," as they are some
times called, also occur in sighted retardates and the
normal blind. Berkson and Davenport {1962) , for example,
found a significant correlation between stereotyped move
ments and age, as well as length of institutionalization.
Among two groups with comparable MA and CA levels, Guess
(1966) found that the blind did demonstrate a greater
incidence of "mannerisms" than the nonambulatory sighted
retardate, and he attributed this to a lack of sensory
input,
Berkson and Davenport (1962) found a negative
correlation between stereotyping and intelligence, which
they thought to be a developmental influence. Later
evidence demonstrated that stereotyping was less evident
when objects were available in the environment (Davenport
& Berkson, 1963), and that situational changes affected
behavior although not significantly (Berkson & Mason,
1963). Toys and conversation were found to reduce ster
eotyping among sighted retardates (Berkson & Mason, 1964),
while specific objects and sound-producing devices re
duced stereotyping among the blind retarded (Guess &
Rutherford, 1967) .
43
Various authors have provided slightly varying
explanations for autoerotic behavior, but the consensus
seems to center around a lack of sensory input or environ
mental restriction. This combination of factors has been
likened to that observed in monkeys raised in the labor
atory {Mason, 1960; Nisson, 1956). They are then said to
provide a substitute stimulation that is important to
motor and tension release.
Quasitheoretical Positions
There appear to be no systematic theoretical
positions that relate directly to the retarded blind.
There are, however, a number of interpretative approaches
that tangentially apply to the behavior and functioning
of this group of children.
Environmental Blocking Viewpoint
Berkson (1964) pointed to their autoerotic behav
ior as the major reason for the blind retardates' inade
quate mode of reacting. He explained that these are
patterns, normal in childhood, that have remained in the
primitive repertoire of the severely defective. He found
the blind to be more restricted in behavior than the
44
sighted, and attributed this to the blocking of a primary
mode of interaction with the environment. Blindness
alone cannot account for such behavior because, even when
there is an above-average amount of stereotyping, the
sighted show the same hesitancy to interact with the
environment. He stated:
Apparently, a very general mechanism re
flected in stereotyped behaviors and restric
tion of environmental contact has been affected
in these patients [Berkson, 1964, p. 259].
He went on to make an even more important point by relat
ing this to learning. Discrimination learning depends
on a number of factors, he felt, among which are remain
ing in the environment, accepting rewards, manipulating
objects, and discriminating stimuli. These factors are
primary to learning in the very young or defective organ
ism. Stereotyping may be the major focus that disorgan
izes the individual's relationship to objects, thus
retarding learning.
The theory of disorganization of learning was
carried a step further by Stone (1964) in a unique study
that suggested altered levels of consciousness in the
retarded blind. Stone hypothesized that blindisms might
create a rhythmic simultaneous sensory bombardment, and
45
thus produce an alteration in the state of consciousness
leading to sleep or one of the lighter stages of sleep.
Stone*s theory was based on a study of sleep induction by
Oswald (1960), who produced sleep in normal subjects by
subjecting them to a series of intense stimuli presented
simultaneously and rhythmically. One of the stimuli
required the subjects to keep time to auditory stimuli
with their hands, an activity not unlike those of the
retarded blind.
Stone identified two different types of blindisms
based on the observation of 40 blind retarded subjects.
He then used electroencephalographic recordings to con
firm altered levels of consciousness depending upon
whether the child was experiencing what Stone called an
"alerting" or a "withdrawal" blindism. Blindism activity
was reduced during the "alerting" phase.
In a time study of stereotyped behaviors, Kaufman
and Levitt (1965) found that these behaviors were more in
evidence during specific periods of the day. The peak
rates were observed before mealtime and rest periods and
during personnel shift changes. The ward schedule at
those times was found to minimize opportunities for dis
charge of tension by constructive means. Kaufman and
46
Levitt's work closely paralleled that of Stone, although
he did not indicate specific times of the day for the
"alerting" or "withdrawal" phases.
In a paper drawing heavily on the latter two
studies, Broadie (1967) hypothesized a theory of inter
mittent stimulus awareness. He suggested that the blind
retardate actually altered his awareness of the environ
ment through internal self-stimulation during certain
periods of the day. He believed that the retardate exper
ienced a greater awareness only at such times as were
necessary to sustain life— namely, at mealtimes.
Psychoanalytic Viewpoint
Another approach to the behavior of the retarded
blind child is more psychoanalytic in nature. The re
sults of Sandler's research (1963) emphasized the learning
and coping disabilities inherent in all blind children.
He stressed the adverse and irreversible effects of blind
ness on ego development:
Briefly, the thesis to be advanced is that
the development of blind and sighted children
follows roughly parallel courses for about twelve
to sixteen weeks after birth, but at the time of
transition from the first (predominantly passive)
oral phase to the second (predominantly active)
phase, the ego development of the blind child
47
pursues a course which results in his passive
self-centeredness and lack of striving toward
mastery at later ages [p. 346].
In the critical phase of development, when the
sighted child turns outward in response to the stimula
tion that it now perceives as coming from the environment,
the blind child is more likely to turn inward, relying on
internal stimulation. Sandler's approach put great empha
sis on the emotional stimulation that the child receives
from the mother. He pointed out that the blind child
lacks continuity with the environment that is afforded
by vision, and as a consequence he directs his attention
to his own bodily experiences. The drive for self-stimu
lation impairs his relationships to things and people
around him.
It appears that many of these children are
abnormally content to be left alone, and to
indulge in repetitive self-stimulating movements
or stereotyped nonadaptive activities [Sandler,
1963, p. 345].
It was further suggested that, although the blind
baby needs extra stimulation to supplement his visual
deficit, he may receive less because of the mother's
reaction to his disability and the difficulty she may
experience in making contact with him. Such situations,
Green and Schecter (1957) indicated, are ready-made for a
48
symbiotic relationship due to the child's obvious help
lessness. In a mother's attempts to be a "good mother"
her behavior often demonstrates two phases: a warm, close
"seductive type" followed by a rejecting phase where
feelings of guilt and anger oscillate (p. 640).
The most important implication derived from the
ego development approach is that the visual deficit inter
poses itself in such a way as to prohibit normal growth.
The child's discontinuity with his environment, which may
include parents, leads to irreversible damage. It can be
partially overcome by early stimulation although parental
rejection may preclude this, thus producing an insoluble
circular problem.
In a similar conclusion, Bachelis (1961) empha
sized the need for constant interchange with the environ
ment to maintain the integrity of the ego. He drew heav
ily on the stimulus-deprivation research when he stated:
Results of studies . . . have shown that
there are critical periods during the develop
ment of an organism in which specific sensory
stimulation is required, lest there result an
irreversible damage or defect to the organism.
Studies of sensory deprivation have shown that a
child must have a lifelong exposure to sensory
stimulation and that it must be maintained at
all times [p. 228].
Other investigators (Escalona, 19 45; Ripon, 19 33;
49
Spitz, 1946) have noted the same kinds of effects on
sighted children reared in institutions, but they place
the emphasis on emotional as well as sensory stimulation.
The period critical to emotional and physical develop
ment varies from three to six months. The loss of the
parent and external stimulation from this point on may
produce postural, linguistic, mental, and manipulative
deficiencies or differences.
Developmental Viewpoint
A third position, informally headed by Anna
Elonen at the University of Michigan, contends that
*
stimulus deprivation is often not permanently debilitat
ing, although many times these children are automatically
mislabeled when they are actually pseudoretarded or pseudo-
autistic. Data supporting this position are drawn from
the diagnostic evaluation and treatment of many children
at the Michigan School for the Blind.
No blind child's development, these data imply,
is universally retarded, and there are always peak per
formances that surpass all expectations. While not dis
avowing the existence of genuine retardation in some blind
children, Elonen and others maintain that a realistic
50
appraisal of the retarded blind child is not being made.
They state:
In our opinion, far too many of these chil
dren are being erroneously adjudged by medical,
psychological, and school personnel, parents,
and courts as defective and uneducable and,
hence, are being recommended for institutional
ization as retarded [Elonen & Zwarensteyn, 1964,
p. 600J .
In verifying this hypothesis, three years later
Elonen, Polzien, & Zwarensteyn (1967) reported on six
children who were taken from the state institution for
the retarded. These researchers found that all six had
made demonstrable progress in the school for the blind
and concluded that
. . . it would seem advisable to examine the
potential progress of other handicapped children
who have been committed under similar circum
stances. . . . especially . . . if they have
shown signs of benefiting from special education
or therapeutic intervention [p. 306].
These conclusions are in agreement with those of
other investigators (Norris, Spaulding, & Brodie, 1957;
Seelye & Thomas, 1966). Norris, et al., for example,
stated:
There is increasing recognition that many
blind children who have been committed to institutions
for mentally defectives could have developed
adequately if conditions had been more favorable
for their development [1957, p. 67].
51
Seelye and Thomas (1966) felt that there are no
"typical" handicapped children and they should not be
considered in such a light. Such children are often
written off as uneducable and designated as candidates
for institutions, and this invariably disqualifies them
from the benefits of further training.
Elonen and the others who advocate the develop
mental approach as central to learning suggest that only
the child's strengths should be considered. His training
should be based on expectations similar to those for a
normal child. Because they place heavy emphasis on the
family and the intrapersonal dynamics of the home, it is
their opinion that, if less emphasis is placed on the
irreversibility of the handicap, a more realistic apprais
al of the effect of blindness would be possible.
The theory of the behavior of the blind retarded
encompasses the psychoanalytic orientation of Sandler,
the partial awareness investigations of Berkson and Stone,
and the developmental stand of Elonen. The continuum of
prognoses ranges from pseudoretardation to inevitability
and, as might be expected, such a divergence gives rise
to a variety of treatment approaches.
52
Treatment Approaches
In considering the problem of the retarded blind,
Hamilton (1958) stated that he could find little help or
few guidelines when evaluating education for this group.
He suggested that education in this area was too often a
series of prescribed activities and that it did not exist
for children with an IQ below 65.
A similar review of treatment approaches by Guess
(1967) stated that most programs for the retarded blind
are simply adapted from programs for the sighted retarded.
He felt that some useful adaptations could be made, but
in general such adaptations must start at a lower level
of development.
Bachelis (1962) wrote that treatment procedures
must rely upon simpler types of sensory stimulation and
cues of a more concrete nature. This is because there is
such a distinct limit to the symbolic interaction that
the blind child can assimilate and use in understanding
the environment and in relating it to himself. It is his
contention that the blind child needs a relatively stable
environment, but one that is filled with warmth, under
standing, and a moderate amount of variety.
53
Almost all educators are of the opinion that a
child must be given the opportunity to develop to his
full potential. This is an accepted maxim, but as Huff
man (1958) stated, "It is simply 'adult verbalism' unless
educators can really succeed in reaching the slow learn
ing blind [p. 65]." The major question is: how can one
really attain this level of education? Huffman's sugges
tions, based on experience, include experimentation,
perseverance, and patience. "Do not be afraid to experi
ment! Keep trying! Be actively patient! [p. 65] She
went on to state that time is the key factor. Because
the blind retardate is characterized by an apparent lack
of interest, the teacher must unceasingly explain and
demonstrate.
The Johnstone Training and Research Center (Ci-
cenia, Belton, Myers, & Mundy, 1965) has developed a
program for the blind retardate that encompasses three
aspects of development: management (self-help skills),
motor, and academic. The management phase is designed to
replicate the activities that a child would receive in
the home. The professional staff helps the child to de
velop social and personal skills that are difficult to
incorporate into the classroom. Through experimentation
it was found that provision for the child's emotional
growth must be made first, and that academic subjects
probably will not be possible without this first step.
Children are classified into verbal, preverbal, and non
verbal groups. Each child is then gradually encouraged
toward speech through a series of carefully planned exper
iences with modest goals. A general program of sensory
motor tasks are used to improve muscle development.
In contrast to this fixed step approach, an open-
ended curriculum has been developed at the Walter E.
Fernald State School (Tretakoff & Farrell, 1958). The
blind retardate advances at his own rate of speed. Here,
as at the Johnstone Center, however, the principal empha
sis is on the child's emotional development. When this
is achieved, the child is advanced to a sense-training
class where he is given opportunity for sensory motor
development and social interaction. Kindergarten is a
natural outgrowth of this stage, and the more advanced
children are given an introduction to braille methods.
When the child does enter the academic levels, achieve
ment is not stressed. Instead, personal development is
considered so important that some children never get
beyond the play therapy stage.
55
Social adjustment is also listed as the primary
goal of the program at the Mansfield Training School
(DeLeo 6 Boly, 1956). The aims of social adjustment are
to eliminate or modify behaviors that are a hindrance to
the blind child's acceptance by his sighted peers. Inter
action with sighted children is encouraged because it is
felt that only in this way can the blind develop realistic
attitudes toward their handicap. Blind children are
pushed toward social interaction and encouraged to become
less dependent on others. The training program follows
this same line and real life experiences, utilizing a
model apartment, are stressed as the best method of learn
ing. The authors asserted that this affords a setting
wherein the need for more basic academic subjects natur
ally develops.
Catty (1940), in discussing the training of nur
sery school blind retardates at the Sunshine Homes,
stressed a point that is just as timely as it was 2 8
years ago. The most important rule, she said, is that
every child needs a different incentive to learning.
They will learn through their hands, but the training of
speech goes with the training of larger muscles and hand
work. She pointed out that speech is a function of
56
interest, and silence is often an indication that the
right method has not yet been found. Finally, she said,
“Where training is characterized by the fact that it is
adapted for each child, it is difficult to give an idea
of [all] methods employed . . . [p. 99] Standardized
curricula do not work well in such a setting.
To a large extent educational programs vary with
the type of child found in the institution. Many programs
cannot be compared because the degree of the population's
impairment is not immediately evident. While it is
recognized that all schools include a broad range of
students, it can generally be noted that with the moder
ately retarded blind children the curriculum is often
very similar to that used with sighted retardates.
Albrecht (1957) described such a program at the
Wisconsin Schpol for the Visually Handicapped. It in
cluded social studies, science, physical education, music,
crafts, and the more basic academics. This program was
based on a maximum amount of concrete experience. How
ever, no feature of the child’s educational experience
was unalterable because Albrecht felt that the curriculum
must be flexible, dependent upon the changing needs and
abilities of the pupil. It was varied often enough to
keep the child open to change.
A similar curriculum for highly trainable blind
retardates was described by Williams (1964). In a Sunland
classroom program, the emphasis was on developing sensory
perception, and social and neuromuscular skills. Methods
and materials in this and in the Wisconsin program did
not vary greatly from those covered in classes for the
trainable sighted retardates.
The Royer-Greaves School is one of the few insti
tutions specializing exclusively in the training of the
retarded blind child. A wide range of ability levels is
accepted, and the child's training may begin at as funda
mental a level as learning how to chew (Greaves, 1953).
Other self-help training measures include toilet train
ing, dressing, and later speech development. Other
authors have discussed social behavior (Strickland, 1946),
academic subjects (Royer-Greaves School for the Blind
Staff, 1952) , and the contribution of music (Bailey,
1950) .
Implications for Research
Many of the findings and programs discussed above
are without empirical bases and generally lack statistical
58
verification. They do provide a background to the over
all problem of the blind retardate, and they lend credence
to the aims of the study. However, it would almost seem
to be necessary to agree with Wolf (19 65), who suggested:
Through the years the terms have changed,
but the question— What to do with the mentally
retarded blind child-still remains largely unan
swered [p. 267].
When recognizing the paucity of literature relat
ing to the retarded blind, it is not surprising that no
research was found relating specifically to the topic of
this study. There are, of course, large independent
bodies of literature covering the blind and the profoundly
retarded. But even they apply only tangentially to the
focus of this study, which is attention and the orienting
reaction. In view of the absence of much research relat
ing specifically to the retarded blind, a brief review of
the orienting reaction and the galvanic skin response
measured as an orienting response is presented. This
section seeks to add depth to this study and to point out
pertinent areas as they apply to exceptional children.
59
The Orientation Reaction
Definition
The discovery of the orientation reaction, or
orienting reflex as it is sometimes called, is attributed
to Pavlov. In a celebrated and frequently-quoted passage,
he stated:
It is this reflex which brings about the
immediate response in man and animals to the
slightest changes in the world around them, so
that they immediately orientate their appropri
ate receptor organ in accordance with the per
ceptible quality in the agent bringing about the
change, making a full investigation of it. The
biological significance of this reflex is obvi
ous. If the animal were not provided with such
a reflex its life would hang at any moment by a
thread. In man this reflex has been developed
with far-reaching results, being represented in
its highest form by inquisitiveness— the parent
of that scientific method through which we hope
one day to come to a true orientation in know
ledge of the world around us [Pavlov, 1927,
p. 71].
The orientation reaction has been recognized as a
fruitful area of research by Soviet scientists ever since
the time of Pavlov. Some of the most organized study has
been carried on in Russia by Sokolov (1954, 1963) and by
a number of American investigators (Berlyne, 1960; Davis,
Buchwald, & Frankmann, 1955; Dykman, Reese, Galbrecht, &
i
Thomasson, 1959; Razvan, 1961; Robinson & Gantt, 1947).
60
These writers have broadened the scope of what is now
called the orienting response and have provided additional
information regarding its basic properties and functions.
Such work has led to the conclusion that this behavior
. . . forms part of a whole constellation
of physiological processes, permeating the entire
organism, that can be elicited by the onset,
termination, intensification, weakening, or
modification in any other way of any kind of
stimulation [Berlyne, 1960, p. 81],
Definition
The older concept of the orienting reaction
equated it more with the consciousness-centered concept
of "attention" (Pillsbury, 1910) . Historically, stimulus
change was the antecedent condition for attention, and
Pillsbury showed that a change in cerebral volume in the
head occurred when the subject was "paying attention."
These response changes are identical to those adopted by
Soviet scientists as measures of the orienting response.
Another approach places the OR in a broader per
spective, considering it as a defined concept with the
same stature as "habit strength," "thinking," or "drive."
Thus it is not equated with an observable dependent vari
able, but is treated as a dispositional concept which
61
gains empirical meaning by its set of antecedent condi
tions and consequent effects {Carnap, 1938).
Recent definitions have become more succinct. In
line with Pavlov's (1927) early observations, they have
considered the OR to be an observable instrumental response
to novel stimuli, which in turn affects subsequent perform
ance (Berlyne, 1960). Maltzman (1962) defined the OR in
much the same way: "a widespread and complex process with
central and peripheral components that is evoked by any
change in stimulation [p. 1]."
Characteristics
The component effects of the orienting reaction
as reflected in the individual were summarized by Berlyne
(I960) as follows:
1. Changes in sense organs,
2. Changes in the skeletal muscles that direct
sense organs.
3. Changes in general skeletal musculature.
4. Changes in the central nervous system.
5. Vegetative changes (pp. 81-82).
Although such changes may be observed visually, there are
a number of objective measurements, including depression
62
of the cortical alpha rhythm, the galvanic skin response,
pupillary dilation, and the complex vasomotor response
consisting of cephalic vasodilation and peripheral vaso
constriction (Maltzman & Raskin, 1965).
One of the basic characteristics of the OR is its
susceptibility to extinction upon repeated presentation
of the stimulus that evoked it. If the stimulus is given
signal value, however, the OR becomes especially resist
ant to extinction or, if it has already been extinguished,
it revives. A stimulus may be given signal value by
pairing it with a biologically important condition such
as food or pain (Razran, 1961), by imposing a discrimina
tion upon S (Sokolov, 1960) , or by requiring S to perform
an instrumental response to the stimulus (Maruszewski,
1957; Luria & Vinogradova, 1959).
Nies (19 64), therefore, has summarized the two
basic properties of the OR as (1) a nonspecific reflex
initiated by any increase, decrease, or qualitative
change of stimulus, independent of the modality of the
stimulating agent; and (2) a reflex that is subject to
extinction or habituation on repeated presentations of
the stimulus (Sokolov, 1960, pp. 5-6).
According to Maltzman and Raskin (1965), the
63
correct interpretation of the OR in relation to other
dependent variables presupposes two functional "proper
ties" of the OR:
The first lawful effect . . . is that the
occurrence of an OR facilitates the reception of
stimulation. It increases the sensitivity of
sensory analyzers, receptors, and their periph
eral and central nervous system (CNS) components.
The second important functional relationship
involving the OR is its effect on learning.
Elicitation of OR's by stimuli facilitates their
conditioning [p.2].
Characteristics among Normals
Since the OR is tied so closely to the subject's
awareness and orientation to the environment, it is under
standable that a number of investigators have explored
its relation to learning. The work of Berlyne (1961;
et al., 1963) has shown that the strength of orienting
behavior is synonymous with exploratory activity, which
is a prime requisite in learning. Among the factors
influencing the strength of the OR are the degree of
novelty, surprisingness, complexity, and power to induce
uncertainty. Berlyne concluded that orienting behavior
increases with novelty, but also with extrinsically
motivated instructions. This latter factor relates heavily
to learning, and it has severe implications for the
64
defective individual who might have trouble comprehending
verbal instructions.
Even among normal subjects there are great dif
ferences in the strength of the OR, and a division is
customarily made between "high" and "low" reactors. At
various times, said Lynn (1966), Pavlov tried to fit
clinical categories to the individual differences in~the
orienting reaction. Other investigators (Block, 1957;
Helper, 1963; Jones, 1935) tried to relate the intensity
of the orienting response measured by the GSR to overt
emotional expression. It has now been shown (Belloni,
1964; Nies, 1963; Standish & Champion, 1960) that the
orienting reaction measured by the GSR is not an indica
tor of an emotionally-based drive as suggested in earlier
work. The same investigators have shown, however, that
high orienters do learn better on certain types (paired
associate) of tasks.
Characteristics among Defectives
Collman (1959) measured the orientation reaction
of 857 English children across a broad intelligence range
(45 to 140). He demonstrated that there are no signifi
cant sex differences in "resting" skin resistance. The
V
65
group in the center of the intelligence scale (70 to 110) ,
however, gave larger responses to novel stimuli than those
at the extremes.
In contrast to these findings were those of
Lohmann and Moskowitz (1966) who showed that the thresh
old for evoking an OR by a novel stimulus is higher among
mongoloids than among normals. This difference was found
to be between 30 and 40 decibels, and it was suggested
that a basic response difference may be operating although
the nature of the difference was not discussed.
Many investigators (Collman, 1959; Luria, 1963;
Streltsova, 1955) have noted irregular patterns in the
orienting reactions of mentally retarded children. It
was argued by Luria (1963) that defects in attention are
the result of poor orienting reactions. Characteristi
cally, these children do not orient to low and medium
intensity stimuli and the reactions they give are un
stable. The child may produce a large response that is
not habituated, or one which disappears after a few trials.
This is attributed to the fact that the retarded child
has a shorter memory, and orienting reactions cannot be
prolonged by verbal instructions.
Abnormalities in the orientation reaction have
66
been found in certain pathological states of mental ill
ness, notably psychosis and neurosis. Lynn (1966) , quot
ing from Russian literature (Vinogradova, 1961) , distin
guished three abnormal kinds of orientation reactions:
1. Qrientation reactions which are both
unusually powerful and extremely difficult to
extinguish. These have been found in acute
schizophrenia, in "infectious psychosis," and
in neurosis.
2. The second type of disorder of the
orientation reaction is its weakness or complete
absence. This type of reaction is found in a
large proportion of schizophrenics. , . . It is
also found in some mental defectives.
3. The third type . . • consists of a dis
ruption of the relation between the orientation
reaction and the defensive reaction. . . . In
this type of impairment the defensive reaction
occurs immediately [p. 93],
There may also be problems in habituation as well as
orientation. This is often the case among old people
suffering from senile dementia, certain schizophrenics,
and certain neurotics.
A number of investigators have tr.ied to demonstrate
a relation between the level of skin conductance or
resistance and intelligence. Pryer and Ellis (1959) -
suggested that moderate retardates (mean IQ 50) had higher
skin conductance levels than the profoundly retarded
(mean IQ 14) . In comparing a group of normals with a
67
group of imbeciles, Venables (1955) produced opposite
results, with the low group showing significantly higher
conductance. Later findings by O'Connor and Venables
(1956) demonstrated a negative correlation between IQ and
skin conductance. This was further confirmed by Ellis
and Sloan (1958), although a basis for generally higher
levels of conductance among the retarded was sustained.
The application of research relating the orienting
response to individual differences can, therefore, pro
vide some insight into the problem of education and psy
chotherapy. If weak ORs in the mentally ill and the
retarded are an indication of inability or unwillingness
to respond to the environment, then educational measures
should be directed toward appropriately augmenting the
subject's orienting response. As Maltzman stated:
A problem of fundamental importance, there
fore, is the development of training and other
techniques for producing permanent augmentation
of the magnitude of OR’s to appropriate environ
mental stimuli. If OR's can be permanently
augmented, then all learning should be facili
tated. Truly nonspecific transfer would be
obtained in this way [Maltzman & Raskin, 1965,
p. 141.
From this discussion of the literature on blind
retarded children, it is apparent that, despite the
obstacles to precise experimental procedure, further
study of the OR should increase our knowledge of individ
ual differences and some of the problems of behavior in
the retarded blind child.
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
Subjects
The subjects were 20 blind retardates from Pacific
State Hospital, Pomona, California. They ranged in age
from nine to sixteen years, and all were classified as
profoundly retarded (intelligence quotients between 6
and 20). Boys and girls were included with no attempt
made to control this variable. All subjects possessed
normal hearing as evaluated for hospital placement.
The subjects were divided into two groups accord
ing to their degree of sightedness: totally blind or par
tially sighted. It should be noted that all the subjects
were diagnosed as "blind," but, from an opthalmological
standpoint, they possessed varying degrees of defective
vision. The partially sighted group was designated as
those receiving some visual stimulation from the environ
ment. The blind subjects had medically diagnosed
69
70
anamolies that totally precluded sight— that is, they
were unable to discriminate darkness and light.
Treatment Groups
The subjects were divided further into groups
and randomly assigned to one of two treatment methods:
operant and classical conditioning. The experimental
group was composed of 10 subjects randomly assigned, who
were treated according to the operant model for shaping
behavior. The control group contained the 10 remaining
subjects and they were treated according to the classical
conditioning paradigm. Before the study was completed,
one subject from each group had been lost due to illness.
Experimental Procedure
The conditioning of the operant or experimental
subjects proceeded in the following manner. The child
was taken into a separate room on the ward at the time he
would normally eat his meal. The apparatus consisted of
a generator, that emitted a single auditory tone which
could be modulated in volume, and a response lever con
tained in a separate unit. The subject was seated at a
table with the response lever within easy reach. Upon
presentation of the tone, he was required to push the
lever to terminate the sound. A diagram of the relation
ship of the subject to the apparatus is presented in
Figure 2.
The behavior of the child was "shaped" to grasp
ing of the lever upon presentation of the tone by "prompt
ing1 1 (i.e., helping) him in his initial attempts to make
the motor response. Later help was gradually withdrawn
or "faded." He was then rewarded with food from his meal
tray for any movement in the direction of the lever. The
lever did not actually terminate the tone, which was con
trolled from the sound unit by the examiner. In this way
the examiner could judge, on the basis of successive
approximations, when a response had been made that merited
reward.
If the child did not respond in ten seconds, the
trial was terminated and there was no reward. A new
trial was begun ten seconds later. The response to the
lever was considered as having taken on discriminative
qualities (Sd) when a variable ratio reinforcement sched
ule of 1:10 (VR-10) was achieved, i.e., the subject was
making 10 responses for every single reinforcement. In
every case this was achieved within the stipulated first
Operant Conditioning Subject
Table
Stimulus Response
Tone Lever
Food
Examiner Subject
Classical Conditioning Subject
Table
Stimulus
Tone
Food
Examiner Subject
Fig. 2. Relationship of subject to apparatus.
73
300 trials.
At that point, the child's name was paired with
the stimulus tone, and the tone was then gradually faded
over the next 250 to 300 trials. This figure fluctuated
among the operant group members due to individual differ
ences in learning rate. The research design assumed that,
by the time the tone became inaudible, the subject would
be responding instrumentally to his name, which was con
sidered to have taken on discriminative qualities. The
conditioning of the experimental group extended over
three weeks (one session per day for approximately 20 to
24 days) with 25 to 30 trials given per session. The
paradigm for this model is presented in Figure 3.
Control Procedure
Empirical evidence (Kelleher & Gollub, 1962)
indicated that one could sometimes establish a previously
neutral stimulus as a discriminant by associating it with
a stimulus that already had reinforcing qualities. In
applying the classical paradigm to this study, the child's
name was paired with food to give it the qualities of a
discriminative stimulus.
The classically conditioned or control subjects
The paradigm for operant conditioning is as follows:
I.
II.
III.
IV.
S (tone)
S (tone)
a. S
b. S
Sd (tone)
OR (attention) Re.(food)
max. 300
trials
a. Sd (tone)
NS (name)
b. Sd (tone faded)
NS (name)
c. Sd (tone dropped)
Sd (name)
max. 300
trials
Sd (name)
R (lever press) Re.(food, FR-1:1)
R (prompt to lever) Re. "
R (systematic approx.) Re. "
R (lever press)
R
R "
R (lever)
Re.(food, FR-1:10)
Re.(food, FR-1:1)
Re.
Re.
Re.(food, FR-1:20)
Fig. 3. Operant conditioning paradigm.
75
were treated in the following manner. They were taken
into the treatment room under the same conditions as the
operant group, with the exception that no response lever
was employed. The subject was first presented with the
stimulus tone to achieve an orienting reaction and thereby
gain his ''attention.1 1 Upon presentation of this novel
stimulus, the subject received immediate food reinforce
ment through 300 trials. This number was chosen on the
basis of the pilot study data, which showed that the
operantly conditioned subjects perceived the tone as a
discriminative stimulus within a maximum of 300 trials.
After 300 trials the tone was considered to have
taken on reinforcing qualities through its association
with the primary reinforcer. The subject's name was now
paired with the tone. The pairing of the name with the
tone gave it the status of a conditioned reinforcer
(Kelleher & Gollub, 1962).
Prom that point, the ratio of reinforcement grad
ually shifted from one reinforcement for each presentation
of the paired stimuli (FR 1:1), to one reinforcement for
every 20 presentations of the stimuli (VR-1:20). The
classically conditioned group received a maximum of 750
trials, with 35 to 40 trials given per session.
76
administered once each day for approximately three weeks.
At the end of that time, again based on the pilot study
data and the classical conditioning work of Kelleher and
Gollub (1962), the name was considered to have taken on
discriminative qualities. This was tested by replaying
the stimulus tape to see if the child now gave an orient
ing reaction when he heard his name. The paradigm for
the classical model is presented in Figure 4.
Although no change in behavior was predicted,
this method allowed for an equal amount of time and atten
tion to be spent with the control group. Use of this
control was meant to alleviate a common criticism: name
ly, that it is the personal attention which a child
receives during operant conditioning that is responsible
for the change in behavior.
Dependent Variables
Two different dependent variables were used to
evaluate the effectiveness of conditioning. According to
the design, the subject's orienting reaction to novel
stimuli, measured as a galvanic skin response (GSR), was
used as one dependent variable. The second dependent
variable was a trials-to-criterion (TC) measure. This
I.
II.
III.
IV.
The paradigm for classical conditioning is as follows:
NS (tone)
S (tone)
Sd (tone) paired
S (name)
S (name)
Sd (tone faded)
max. 300
trials
max. 450
trials
Sd (name)
OR (attention)
OR (attention)
OR (attention)
OR (attention)
OR (attention)
Re. (foodr FR-1:1)
Re. (food, FR-1:10)
Re. (food, FR-1:1)
Re. (food)
(Reinforcement
gradually to a
FR-1:20 schedule)
Re. (food, FR-1:20)
Fig. 4. Classical conditioning paradigm.
-4
~ 4
78
was simply a cumulative record of the number of trials
needed to achieve the criterion of conditioning (VR-20)
*
in the operantly conditioned group. This method could
not be used with the classical group, because there was
no instrumental response to indicate when a child, accord
ing to his own learning rate, had achieved the criterion.
The interaction of the dependent and independent
variables presented in Figure 5 is after notation by
Kerlinger (1965).
Galvanic Skin Response
The orienting response can sometimes be observed
visually, but it also has several physiological corre
lates. The galvanic skin response is one of the easiest
of these to record. The strength of the discriminative
stimulus was, therefore, recorded physiologically as an
OR on a pre- and posttest basis.
After conditioning had taken place, the strength
of the Sd was measured by again presenting the subject's
name to him among a group of neutral stimuli (other
names) and nonsense syllables. If the Sd (name) was
learned, the subject would attend or register an orienting
reaction to it when he heard it among a group of neutral
Criterion
GSR GSR Mean
Pretest Groups Posttest Trials
Yb
Totally Blind Xla
Ya
X
Yb
Partially Sighted X ^
Ya
X
Yb
Operant Conditioning X2 a
Ya
X
Yb
Classical Conditioning X2^
Ya
Fig. 5. Interaction of independent and dependent variables.
80
sounds.
The galvanic skin response was recorded from a
Brush Mark II two-channel oscillograph, with the magnitude
of the responses measured by an Eico decade resistance
box. The skin resistance, coming across a Wheatstone
Bridge, was picked up from two silver dime-like elec
trodes attached to the foot of the subject. The foot is
an acceptable area from which to record GSR (Woodworth
and Schlosberg, 1954) and that location was ideal for
retarded patients who are often hyperactive.
The mean log conductance difference in the magni
tude of the GSR deflections was the basis of comparing
the groups. These deflections were computed by the
formula:
log [(—— - i—) x 108 + 1]
Ra Rb
In the formula, R^ represents the subject’s baseline
resistance in ohms at the presentation of the stimulus,
and R& represents the greatest magnitude of the response
in ohms (Lacy & Siegal, 1949). This formula allows the
resistance to be converted into log conductance, which
Woodworth and Schlosberg (1954) and Haggard (1949) indi
cated is the most accurate method of comparing GSR
81
responses. A GSR deflection was considered to represent
a significant response if it was at least 200 ohms in
magnitude and occurred between 1.5 and 3.5 seconds after
the input of the stimulus (Venables & Martin, 1967).
Figure 6 shows a facsimile GSR tracing.
The baseline resistance was achieved in the fol
lowing manner. Each subject was brought into the exper
imental room, and after he had been seated in a reclining
contour chair, the electrodes were attached to his foot
(two points on the sole of one foot). Ten minutes were
then allowed for the subject to relax and for his re
sistance to stabilize. After ten minutes, the subject
was replaced in the circuit by the resistance box, and
the reading thus achieved was considered the basal re
sistance. The basal resistances ranged from 23,000 to
280,000 ohms.
The stimuli for the pretest and posttest measure
ment of the GSR were recorded on tape to standardize the
presentation. A schema for the presentation of the
stimuli is included in Figure 7.
The stimulus tape contained a total of eight
words. Included among the stimuli were the subject's own
name, neutral names, and a nonsense' syllable. The neutral
b
resistance
in ohms
50,000
80,000
V I f I t t I I I t I f I t I I I I I
time in seconds
a represents the point of stimulation.
b represents the height of the response {actually a drop in skin resistance).
Fig. 6. Facsimile GSR recording.
00
to
83
SI Dorothy
S2 Jane
S3 William
S4 Subject's name
S5 Subject's name
S6 Subject's name
S7 Subject's name
S8 Nonsense syllable
xx Data from S4 and S8 were recorded to be analyzed.
Fig. 7. Order of presentation of taped stimuli.
84
names were presented first (they were the same for each
subject), and thus, if the subject's name were an Sd,
there was ample opportunity for him to respond when it
occurred. Thereafter, three more presentations of the
subject's name followed, each with a different inflection,
followed by the presentation of the nonsense syllable.
The nonsense syllable was different for each subject, and
it was made to sound somewhat like the subject's name.
The nonsense syllable, following three similar sounds,
took the character of a novel stimulus, thereby increas
ing the possibility of an OR to it. This arrangement
afforded equal probability that a subject would orient to
both the nonsense and discriminative stimuli. The tape
was presented twice, making a total of sixteen stimuli
presented. Only two presentations of the name and two
of the nonsense syllable were recorded for analysis.
Trials-to-criterion
The second dependent variable was a trials-to-
criterion (TC) measure. It was represented by the cumu
lative number of trials needed by each subject in the
operant group to reach an optimal level of conditioning.
According to Zimmerman (1959) , a fixed ratio (FR-1:20)
85
schedule of one reinforcement for every twenty responses
is necessary to achieve permanent conditioning. If any
child failed to achieve the optimal level of conditioning,
an arbitrary limit of 750 trials was set as the alterna
tive criterion. This was felt to be a fair limit for, in
the pilot study, total conditioning was achieved in a
maximum of 600 trials.
Analysis of the Data
The dependent variable identified as GSR, which
was used as a measure of the subject's orienting response
to a discriminative stimulus, was treated in accordance
with the statistical procedures for the analysis of vari
ance for repeated measures as described by Winer (1962) .
This test allows for three main effects to be tested
simultaneously: between subjects, between methods, and
the pre- to posttest change. The difference between the
nonsense and discriminative stimuli was measured by the
analysis of variance as described by Edwards (1960) . The
dependent variable identified as trials-to-criterion was
treated according to the statistical procedures described
by Edwards (1960) for a two-way analysis of variance.
The simple analysis of variance was used to test
Research Hypothesis I, that the response to the discrim
inative and nonsense stimuli would not differ signifi
cantly among any of the groups on the pretest as measured
by the dependent variable GSR. The same test was used to
measure Research Hypothesis II, that the responses to the
discriminative and nonsense stimuli would differ signifi
cantly only for the operant group on the posttest as
measured by the dependent variable GSR. In both instances
the mean log conductance from the respective pre- and
posttests was the basis for computing the analysis of
variance.
The analysis of variance for repeated measures
was used to test Research Hypothesis III, that the pre
test to posttest increase of the operantly conditioned
group to the discriminative stimulus would be significant
ly larger than that of the classically conditioned group
as measured by the dependent variable GSR. The same test
was also used to evaluate Research Hypothesis IV, that the
pretest to posttest increase of the partially sighted
subjects to the discriminative stimulus would be signifi
cantly larger than that of the totally blind subjects as
measured by the dependent variable GSR. In both instances
the mean log conductance increase from pre- to posttest
87
was the basis for computing the analysis.
The simple analysis of variance was again used to
test Research Hypothesis V, that the partially sighted
subjects would have significantly lower mean trials to
criterion. The data used to compute the analysis were
comprised of the mean number of trials needed by the
operant group to achieve the predetermined level of condi
tioning .
Significance Levels
The .05 significance level was used as the maxi
mum probability at which the null hypothesis could be
rejected. In so doing, a five per cent risk of making a
Type I error was accepted by the researcher. The data
were transformed by a Honeywell computer in the Socio-
Behavioral Study Center, Pacific State Hospital, Pomona,
California.
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
Nonsense and Discriminative Stimuli
The first analysis of the data considered the
similarity of the pretest discriminative and nonsense
stimuli. It had been assumed, from observations on the
ward, that the subject's name was equivalent to a neutral
stimulus before the study began. If the responses obtained
to the pretest stimuli (nonsense and discriminative) were
of comparable magnitude, it would be taken as an indica
tion that they were equal in meaning (i.e., both were
nonsense stimuli).
This proposition was tested by Research Hypothe
sis I, that the response to the discriminative and to the
nonsense stimuli would not differ significantly among any
of the groups on the pretest as measured by the dependent
variable (GSR). A two-way analysis of variance was com
puted for each group to test this hypothesis. The data
88
are presented in Table 1. It will be noted from the table
that the number of subjects and the degrees of freedom
are not equal within all four groups. As was mentioned
in Chapter I under the limitations of the study, two
subjects— *one from the operant group and one from the
classical group— had to be dropped due to illness. Con
sidering the robustness of analysis of variance as a test,
and the fact that the groups were still balanced, it was
not felt that this adversely affected the results of the
data.
The second hypothesis was designed to test whether
changes in responsiveness after conditioning were due to
the discriminative stimulus having been learned, that is,
if the subject was now more responsive to the trained
stimulus. To be meaningful, his response to it had to be
compared against his response to the nonsense stimulus.
The name and the nonsense stimuli were again individually
compared, but on a posttest basis. The proposition was
tested by Research Hypothesis II, that the responses to
the discriminative and nonsense stimuli would differ sig
nificantly only for the operant group on the posttest as
measured by the dependent variable (GSR). The hypothesis
was tested by computing again a two-way analysis of
90
Table 1
Analysis of Variance of Pretest Comparisons
of Nonsense and Discriminative Stimuli
for Experimental Groups
Group
Source of
Variance
df MS F
Operantly Conditioned Groups
Blind Between stimuli 1 .080 .144 NS
Within groups 6 .553 —
Total 8
Partial Between stimuli 1 .020 .072 NS
Sighted
Within groups 8 .276
Total 10
Classically Conditioned Groups
Blind Between stimuli 1 1.260 9.130
*
Within groups 6 .138
Total 8
Partial Between stimuli 1 9.190 31.570
**
Sighted
Within groups 8 .291
Total 10
* p <.05
** p <.01
variance for each of the four groups. The data for this
analysis are presented in Table 2.
The posttest results confirmed that, for both of
the operant groups, there was a significant difference in
the magnitude of the subjects' responses to the two stimu
li. The differences were found to be significant at the
.05 and .01 levels of confidence. The subjects' responses
to the discriminative stimulus (i.e., their name) increased
while overall responses to the nonsense stimuli decreased.
The operant conditioning procedure, therefore, had
an effect not limited simply to increasing the subject's
attentiveness. It significantly increased attention for
the discriminative stimulus, thereby indicating that a
response to it had been learned, because no difference
between the name and nonsense stimuli existed at the pre
test, The child was now orienting (attending to) his
name.
For the classical groups, the pretest results had
shown that there were significant differences between the
name and nonsense stimuli before conditioning began.
These subjects appeared to be discriminating (attending
to) the oral presentation of their name previous to con
ditioning. The pretest differences between the classical
92
Table 2
Analysis of Variance of Posttest Comparisons
of Nonsense and Discriminative Stimuli
for Experimental Groups
Group
Source of
Variance
df MS F
Operantly Conditioned Groups
Blind Between stimuli 1 2.680 15.230
**
Within groups 6 .171
Total 8 *
Partial Between stimuli 1 1.520 10.850
*
Sighted
Within groups
Total
8
10
.140
Classically Conditioned Groups
Blind Between stimuli
Within groups
Total
1
6
8
.100
.958
.104
Partial Between stimuli 1 1.670 7.100
*
Sighted
Within groups
Total
8
10
.235
* p <.05
** p <.01
93
and operant groups are graphically depicted in Figure 8.
The posttest of the classical groups showed an
uneven pattern of results. Among the blind classically
conditioned subjects, there was now no significant dif
ference in reaction to the two stimuli, where there had
previously been significant differences. Responsiveness
had increased significantly to the nonsense stimulus, but
only slightly to the discriminant. The partially sighted
subjects maintained the significant (.05) level) differ
ence between stimuli that were present on the pretest.
The classical conditioning trials, therefore,
could not be said to have increased the subjects1 respon
siveness to their name. The classical model may, in
fact, have produced an irregular orienting pattern, al
though this cannot be determined from the data. The
higher pretest levels, the conditioning model, or a
combination may have caused the uneven results. The
posttest differences in response for both groups are
graphically depicted in Figure 9.
The previous two hypotheses were used to test
whether the subject's name was equivalent to a nonsense
stimulus previous to conditioning; and, after condition
ing, whether reactivity to the nonsense stimulus was
Log Conductance Scores
10.00
9.00
94
8.00
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
8.12
4.32
3.48 3.50
Sd N
Blind
3.10
4.12
.94
i
i
i
Sd N
Partially
Sighted
Sd N
Blind*
4.56
Sd N
Partially
Sighted*
Operant Conditioning
Group
Classical Conditioning
Group
* difference significant at the .05 level.
Pig. 8. Pretest difference in response to discrimina
tive stimuli (Sd) and rionsense stimuli (N) by conditioning
groups.
Log Conductance Scores
10.00
9.00
95
8.00
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
5.58
3^98
Sd N
Blind*
7.08
3.19
4.62 4-64
7.32
Sd N
Partially
Sighted*
Sd N
Blind
3.22
Sd N
Partially
Sighted*
Operant Conditioning
Group
Classical Conditioning
Group
* difference significant at the .05 level.
Fig. 9. Posttest differences in response to discrim
inative stimuli (Sd) and nonsense stimuli (N) by condi
tioning groups.
96
significantly lower than to the discriminant. These
procedures tested only the change on the pre- and post
test measures individually. If they were borne out, they
would readily depict any meaningful changes in responsive
ness to the two stimuli. These changes were important,
however, only if an overall increase could be shown to
the discriminative stimulus alone (the name) as a result
of conditioning. This proposition was tested by three
hypotheses.
Comparison of Methods
The pre- to posttest change in responsiveness was
tested by Research Hypothesis III, that the increase in
responsiveness to the discriminative stimulus of the
operantly conditioned group would be significantly larger
than that of the classically conditioned group as measured
by the dependent variable (GSR). This hypothesis was
tested by a 2 x 2 x 2 analysis of variance for repeated
measures. The data from that analysis are presented in
Table 3.
The first main effect of the analysis tested the
difference between methods of conditioning (i.e., classi
cal and operant). This comparison did not achieve
97
Table 3
Three-way Analysis of Variance of GSR Scores
Source of Variation df MS F
Between subjects 17
A Groups 1 .1620
B Methods 1 .3761 -
AB 1 .8792 2.58 NS
Subj. w. groups 14 .3404
Within subjects 18_
C Pretest-posttest 1 .5675 5.45
*
AC 1 .0069
—
BC 1 .7396 7.11
*
ABC 1 .2646 —
C x subj. w. groups 14 .1040
Total 35
* p <..05
** p <.01
98
significance in that there were no differences in the
responsiveness of the groups that could be attributed to
conditioning models. These results could only be inter
preted, however, in light of the fact that the groups did
not begin at equal levels. This finding was discussed
above, and it will be considered at length in Chapter V.
Pretest to Posttest Comparison
The second main effect bearing on the increase in
subject responsiveness was tested in the pretest to post
test analysis. The results showed that there was an over
all increase in the magnitude of the subjects1 responses
from pre- to posttesting. This increase was found to be
significant at the .05 level of confidence. These find
ings took on an even greater importance when they were
considered against the interaction of methods with the
time of testing. This interaction was also found to be
significant at the .05 level of confidence.
The summary data presented in Figure 10 are useful
in the interpretation of the interaction. The notation
follows statistical procedures outlined by Winer (1962).
The test of the comparison between the operant pretest
and operant posttest is given by the formula:
99
Methods (B)
Operant Classical
Conditioning Conditioning
(bo) (bi)
Pretest
(ao)
Pretest-
Posttest (C)
Posttest
(ai)
Comparison F
Operant pretest vs.
operant posttest
Operant pretest vs.
classical pretest
Classical pretest vs.
classical posttest
Classical posttest vs.
operant posttest
F .99 (1, 14) = 8.86
Fig. 10. The interaction of the methods and pretest-
posttest variable.
28.155 **
23.481 **
.123
.658
7.82 12.24
>
11/
\ /
12.66 =
I K
— 11.92
100
(abQO - abio)2 (7.82 - 12.66)2
p = -- = ---- — 28.155
E c2 nr MS res(w) 2(4)(.1040)
The data used in the numerator were taken from Figure 10.
In the denominator, nr is the number of experimental
units summed to obtain the total in the comparison, Sc2
is the sum of squares of the coefficients in the compari
son, and MS is the appropriate error term for the compar
ison (Winer, 1962, pp. 407-408).
The interaction analysis, after the formula above,
compared the operant and classically conditioned groups
specifically in relation to the pretest-posttest variable.
Those data identify the operant group as having made a
significant increase (beyond the .01 level of confidence)
as a result of conditioning, while the classical group
decreased slightly. The data also underscore a point
already known, that there were significant differences
between the operant and classical groups initially.
The study further hypothesized that the partially
sighted subjects would learn better under both condition
ing models. This hypothesis was based on the premise
that added visual cues would aid learning significantly.
It was tested by Research Hypothesis IV, which stated
101
that the pre- to posttest increase in responsiveness to
the discriminative stimulus of the partially sighted
subjects would be significantly larger than that of the
totally blind subjects as measured by the dependent
variable (GSR). This hypothesis was tested under the
same three-way design presented in Table 3.
Comparison of Subject Groups
The third major main effect compared subject
groups, and it was used to test Research Hypothesis IV.
These results indicated no significant differences in
responses between the blind and partially sighted subjects,
nor was there any significant interaction between these
two groups and methods (types of conditioning). Further
more, there was no significant interaction between the
groups on the pretest-posttest measures, nor was the
three-way interaction significant (groups x methods x
pretest-posttest).
A final analysis tested the difference between the
blind and partially sighted subjects on a performance
variable. That variable represented the number of trials
needed by the operant group to achieve permanent condition
ing. It was predicted that the sighted would learn the
task faster than the blind subjects.
This proposition was tested by Research Hypothe
sis V, that the partially sighted subjects would have a
significantly lower number of mean trials on the behav
ioral dependent variable (TC). The hypothesis was tested
by a two-way analysis of variance. The data are pre
sented in Table 4.
The data showed that there were no significant
differences between the subject groups as indicated by
the number of trials needed to achieve optimal condition
ing. On neither the physiological (GSR) nor the per
formance variable (trials) was the degree of sightedness
differentiated. Both groups learned equally well. As a
consequence, the degree of sightedness could not be con
sidered a factor in the learning of the tasks set forth
in this study.
103
Table 4
Analysis of Variance for the Performance Variable
(Trials to criterion)
Operantly Conditioned Group
Group
Source of
Variance
df MS F
Between
subjects 1 7840.0 .209 NS
Blind and
Partially
Sighted
Within
groups
Total
6
10
37465.3
* p <.05
** p <.01
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND IMPLICATIONS
Summary
The purpose of this research was to demonstrate
that a discriminative stimulus could be conditioned in
profoundly retarded blind children. The study took a
stimulus that was apparently neutral for the members of
the group (the subject's name), and conditioned them to
respond to it through its association with a primary
reinforcer (food). An operant model and a classical
model for changing behavior were compared. The operant
conditioning design required the subject to press a lever
in response to the discriminated stimulus, while in the
classical model the discriminative stimulus was paired
with food to give it the status of a conditioned rein
forcer. To evaluate the effect of vision on learning,
the subjects were divided into blind and partially sighted
groups. The study was made up of four groups with five
104
105
members in each group.
The subject's name was chosen as the conditioned
stimulus because of previous research recommendations
that the name should be the focal point of training pro
grams with the retarded. The name was presented to the
subject on tape in a series of nonsense and neutral
stimuli, and his recognition of it was recorded by an
orienting reaction (OR). After training, the subject's
name was again presented to him and his reaction recorded.
The OR was measured physiologically as the galvanic skin
response (GSR). The difference between the GSR scores,
measured on a pretest and posttest basis, was the depend
ent variable used to test the thypotheses.
Conclusion and Implications
The initial hypothesis of the study was designed
to test whether or not the subjects were physiologically
responding to their name before conditioning began. The
meaning of this was simply that a child might possibly
have comprehended his name, but have given no outward
evidence of having heard it when called. It was an obser
vational precondition to the selection of subjects that
none of them responded when their name was called.
106
Therefore, both a physiological and an observational test
were used to attempt to make certain that the subjects'
perception of their name was equivalent to a nonsense
syllable prior to conditioning.
It was found, however, that the two groups (clas
sical and operant) were not comparable when the pretest
responses to the stimuli were analyzed. For the operant
group, the name was equivalent to a nonsense syllable
before conditioning (i.e., subjects' ORs to their name and
the nonsense sounds were of equal magnitude). For the
classical group, on the other hand, the two stimuli were
discriminated differently. Those subjects made a stronger
response to their name. Therefore, before the experiment
began, the subjects in this group appeared to recognize
their name when they heard it, in spite of the fact that
they had made no observable response to their name.
Using the benefit of hindsight, it would appear
that both the observational and the physiological test .
should have been made before the subjects were placed in
groups. At the time, however, it seemed more important
to keep the physiological test within the context of the
design and control error by randomizing the subjects.
Although it would probably have been ideal to have
107
replaced this group entirely, there were not enough suit
able subjects to do this. Consequently, the subjects
were retained to see what changes, if any, would be
brought about by the conditioning procedure.
After conditioning was completed, the posttest
showed that those in the operant group had apparently
"learned'' the discriminant (their name) . Their responses
were now significantly greater than to the nonsense syl
lable. As a result of having been paired with food, the
name now had more meaning than the nonsense syllable; the
subjects had learned to respond to it as a specific stim
ulus.
The pattern of responses of those in the classi
cal group was more erratic after training, but their
overall scores were not much different from their scores
when the experiment began. Only one group (blind, clas
sically conditioned) had now become more responsive to
nonsense syllables. This change could be attributed to
chance. Two reasons were seen as possible explanations
to the performance of the classical group: (1) the train
ing procedure was not effectual in causing them to dis
criminate between the two stimuli or, being at a higher
level, they already knew their names and the training
108
procedure was simply overlearning. Possible substantia
tion is to be found in the literature where Germana and
Pavlik (1964) suggested that performance may drop after
the consolidation point of learning has been achieved.
It is not known whether this is a reasonable assumption
when applied to profoundly retarded subjects.
As has been shown, the operant conditioning method
was successful in causing subjects to become more respon
sive to a specific stimulus. The initial analysis did
not measure how much the subjects' responses to the
stimulus increased as a result of conditioning. This
factor was seen by the researcher as the most important
one in determining the effectiveness of conditioning. To
test this proposition, a three-way analysis of variance
for repeated measures was used, which tested the differ
ence between treatments (conditioning methods), between
groups (blind and partially sighted), as well as the pre-
to posttest change in responsiveness.
The results of the first main effect showed that
there were no differences between treatment methods.
That is, the operant and classical models, measured as
subject responsiveness to a specific stimulus, were not
significantly different. As was pointed out earlier,
109
these two groups were different when the study began, and
since they ended on approximately the same level, no
significant differences were to be expected.
In the initial analysis, discussed above, the
relative magnitude of the responses to the two different
stimuli (name and nonsense) were considered separately,
once for the pretest and once for the posttest. This was
done so that any change in subject responsiveness could
be attributed to a specific stimulus. Otherwise it would
not have been possible to say that any gains were the
result of increased response to the specific stimulus.
An overall increase might simply have been explained as an
increased responsiveness to all stimuli.
It is worth noting that the mean magnitude of the
ORs of all groups was nearly the same after conditioning.
The increase in responsiveness of the operant group had
brought it up to the level of the classical group. This
seemed to confirm what had been suspected, that the
classical conditioning subjects had probably been more
alert, as a group, before the experiment began; and that
the training which the lower operant group received had
actually made them more like the classical conditioning
group, as judged by response to a specific trained
stimulus.
It is, however, the contention of this writer,
as well as of Lovaas (1966), that, if children can gain
secondary reinforcers through the classical paradigm,
there would be observable changes in behavior as evidence.
In point of fact, the child's name is constantly paired
with food in the classical manner during the normal feed
ing routine on the ward. There was no evidence that the
name was thereby recognized as having meaning, and it
was not possible to change the child's behavior by pre
senting the name.
The researcher also attempted to modify the sus
tained performance schedule proposed by Zimmerman (1959) .
The increments were made smaller and the steps between
them more gradual, but the situation did not change with
these smaller ratios. This naturally leads to a question
about the feasibility of such schedules with profoundly
retarded subjects. Under these conditions it may also be
reasonable to question the permanency of ORs achieved with
such a schedule. In other words, if a permanent schedule
could not be instituted it is possible that the subjects
might not continue to orient to their name after training
stopped. The inevitable suggestion is that further
Ill
research is required because the question can not be
answered with the information available.
The second main effect of the analysis of variance
showed that there were no differences between the blind
and partially sighted subjects. From the physiological
data, there were no differences in responsiveness that
could distinguish between subjects on the basis of
sightedness, both groups appearing to have learned with
equal facility.
The equality of the blind and partially sighted
subjects was also confirmed by the performance data. The
cumulative number of trials the operant group needed to
learn the lever press was also subjected to an analysis
of variance. This performance variable failed to reveal
any differences in learning rate.
This may possibly be explained by the fact that
the task was specifically designed to aid the blind child.
The bell served as a cue to arouse his attention and to
orient him in space. For those subjects who were severely
withdrawn, it also produced a primary orienting reaction.
This initial OR, according to Maltzman and Raskin (1965) ,
increases the potential for learning by focusing attention
and stimulating the receptors. It could be argued that
112
the name alone would have been enough to achieve the same
results had it been paired with food. But, since the
blind and sighted subjects learned equally well, it may
be assumed that the blind child profited from the added
cues; otherwise, the sighted subjects would have been
expected to learn more readily.
This finding may lend weight to the theory of
researchers (Elonen & Zwarensteyn, 1964; Elonen, Polzien,
& Zwarensteyn, 1967) who suggest that blind children
should be given more challenging learning experiences.
It may also point to a need for development of more
specialized curricula for blind retardates rather than
the adoption of those for sighted retardates or normal
blind.
By far the most important finding of this research
was that there did exist a significant increase in re
sponsiveness to the discriminative stimulus (the name)
for the operant group. These results showed that the
operant training was successful in causing severely with
drawn patients to recognize and respond to an external
stimulus.
Children such as this have heretofore been de
scribed as responding only to internal stimulation
113
(Davenport & Berkson, 1963; Guess & Rutherford, 1967).
Those who propose treatment for these children usually
suggest that other objects and activities in the immediate
environment will reduce "stereotyping.1 1 That is, repeti
tive behavior must be stopped before the child can be
brought into closer contact with the environment. It
has not been conclusively demonstrated (Berkson and
Mason, 1963), however, that these activities make the
child more responsive to external stimulation, and this
must be considered the key to the overcoming of the blind
retardate's withdrawal.
This study has shown that specific techniques can
be derived for training the withdrawn retardate to respond
to cues in the environment. If the child begins to
respond to external cues, such as perceiving his name with
meaning, then this must be considered a first step from
which other behaviors could be instituted. The next logi
cal step for research would be to determine if the re
sponses that have been trained will support other behav
iors.
By demonstrating that a discriminative stimulus
could be conditioned in profoundly retarded blind chil
dren, the prime hypothesis of the study was borne out.
114
The observation of behavioral changes such as these has
led some investigators to question whether neurological
changes might not be taking place as well. In fact,
these findings were seen as a partial substantiation of
Bernal's (1965) hypothesis that significant neurological
changes may be correlated with the behavioral changes
effected by operant conditioning. It is, however, the
intent of this writer only to point out that a significant
galvanic skin response existed after conditioning where
none had existed before conditioning. No attempt was
made to explain the neurological importance of such a
finding.
The subjects in this study were conditioned to
respond to a specific stimulus, which led to greater
orienting behavior, and which in turn brought them into
closer contact with the external environment. As Maltz-
man and Raskin (1965) have pointed out, the goal of educa
tors and therapists should be training techniques that
will augment appropriate orienting responses, for it is
only in this way that permanent behavioral changes can be
effected.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
115
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Albrecht, M. A curriculum for a class of mentally
retarded blind children. International Journal
for the Education of the Blind, 1957, 1 _, 33-42.
American Foundation for the Blind. Services for blind
persons in the United States. New York: Author,
1960.
American Printing House for the Blind. Report: The sur
vey of the multiple-handicapped, visually handi
capped . Louisville, Ky.: Author, 1955,
Anderson, R. M. The visually impaired mentally retarded:
A selected bibliography. New Outlook for the
Blind, 1965, 59, 1-4.
Bachelis, L. A. Symposium— Self-image: A guide to ad
justment: II. Some characteristics of sensory
deprivation. New Outlook for the Blind, 1961,
55, 288-291.
Bailey, E, B. Music contribution to the growth and
development of the blind child with an added
handicap. St. Louis: American Association of
Instructors of the Blind, 1950, 151-154.
Ball, T., & Porter, W. An exploration of the uses of the
orienting response. National AAMD Convention.
Denver, Colorado', 1967, p. 5. (Mimeographed.)
Bauman, M. K., & Hayes, S. P. A manual for the psycho
logical examination of the adult blind. New
York: New York Psychological Corporation, 1951.
116
117
Belloni, M. L. The relationship of the orienting reac
tion and manifest anxiety to paired-association
learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of California, Los Angeles, 1964.
Bensberg, G. J. Teaching the mentally retarded. Atlanta:
Southern Regional Education Board, 1965.
Berkson, G., & Davenport, R. K., Jr. Stereotyped move
ments of mental defectives. American Journal of
Mental Deficiency, 1962, £6, 849-852.
Berkson, G., & Mason, W. A. Stereotyped movements of
mental defectives: III. Situational effects.
American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1963, 68,
409-412.
Berkson, G., & Mason, W. Stereotyped movements of mental
defectives: IV, The effects of toys and the
character of the acts. American Journal of Mental
Deficiency, 1964, £8, 511-524.
Berlyne, D. E, Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1960.
Berlyne, D. E. Conflict and the orientation reaction.
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1961, 62 (6) ,
476-483.
Bernal, M. E. GSR studies of autistic children. Paper
presented in Symposium, Chicago, 1965. (Mimeo
graphed.)
Bijou, S. W,, & Baer, D. M. A systematic empirical
theory. Child Development, 1965, 1, 271-272.
Block, J. A study of affective responsiveness in a lie
detection situation. Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology, 1957, 55^, 11-15.
Boly, L. F., & DeLeo, G. M. Considerations in an educa
tional program for the institutionalized blind.
American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1956, 61,
89-90.
118
Broadie, R, External stimulus awareness in profoundly
retarded blind children. Unpublished paper,
Pacific State Hospital, Pomona, Calif., 1967.
Buell, C. Motor performance of visually handicapped
children. Exceptional Children, 1950, 17, 69-72.
Carnap, R. Testability and meaning. Philosophy of
Science, 1938, £, 1-40.
Catty, N. The teaching of retarded blind children. New
Beacon, 1940, 24, 73-75; 98-99.
Cawley, J. F., & Spotts, J. V. Survey of treatment and
educational facilities and programs for retard
ates with accompanying sensory defects; Auditory
and visual impairments. Connecticut University,
1967, in press.
Charney, L. Minority group within two minority groups.
International Journal for the Education of the
Blind, 1960, 10, 37-43.
Cicenia, E. F., Belton, J. A., Myers, J. J., & Mundy, G.
The blind child with multiple handicaps: A chal
lenge. Part II. The educational program.
International Journal for the Education of the
Blind. 1965, 14, 105-112.
Collman, R. D. The Galvanic Skin Response of mentally
defective children and other children in England.
American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1959, 63,
626-632.
Cruickshank, W. M., & Johnson, G. O. The education of
exceptional children and youth. New York: Pren
tice Hall, 1958.
Curtis, W, S. The evaluation of verbal performance in
multiply handicapped blind children. Exceptional
Children, 1966, 32 (8), 217-220.
Cutsforth, T, D. The blind in school and society. New
York: American Foundation for the Blind, 1951.
119
Davenport, R., & Berkson, G. Stereotyped movements of
mental defectives: II. Effects of novel objects.
American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1963, 67,
879-882.
Davis, C. J. The assessment of intelligence of visually
handicapped children. International Journal for
the Education of the Blind, 1962, 1£, 48-51.
Davis, R. C., Buchwald, A. M,, & Frankmann, R. w. Auto
nomic and muscular responses and their relation
to simple stimuli. Psychological Monographs,
1955, No. 405.
DeLeo, G. M., & Boly, F. F. Program for the institution
alized blind and partially sighted mentally sub
normal. American Journal of Mental Deficiency,
1956, 61, 134-140.
DiMichael, S. G. Meeting the needs of retarded blind
children. Report to the American Association of
Instructors of the Blind, Worthington, Ohio,
June, 1956.
Dinsmoor, J. A. A quantitative comparison of the dis
criminative and reinforcing functions of a stimu
lus. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1950,
40, 458-472.
Dokecki, P. R. Verbalism and the blind: A critical review
of the concept and the literature. Exceptional
Children, 1966, 32 (8), 59-62.
Donlon, E. T. An evaluation center for the blind child
with multiple handicaps. The Education of the
Blind, 1964, 13, 75-78.
Dunn, L. C. Exceptional children in the schools. New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1963.
Dykman, R. A., Reese, W. G., Galbrecht, C. R., & Thomas-
son, P. J. Psychophysiological reactions to
novel stimuli: Measurement, adaptation, and rela
tionship of psychological variables in the normal
human. Annals of the New York Academy of Science,
1959, 79, 43-107.
120
Edwards, A. L. Experimental design in psychological re
search. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
1960.
Ellis, N., & Sloan, W. The relationship between intelli
gence and skin conductance. American Journal of
Mental Deficiency, 1958, 63^ 304.
Elonen, A. S., Polzien, M., & Zwaresteyn, s. B. The
"Uncommitted" blind child: Results of intensive
training of children formerly committed to insti
tutions for the retarded. Exceptional Children,
1967, 33 (5), 24-29.
Elonen, A. S., & Zwarensteyn, S. B. Michigan*s summer
program for multiple-handicapped blind children.
New Outlook for the Blind. 1963, £2, 77-82.
Elonen, A. S., & Zwarensteyn, S. B. Appraisal of Develop
mental lag in certain blind children. The Jour
nal of Pediatrics, 1964, £5 (4), 62-63.
English, H. B., & English, A. C. A comprehensive dic
tionary of psychological and psychoanalytical
terms. London: Longmans, Green, 1958.
Escalona, S. K. Feeding disturbances in the very young.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1945, 15,
76-80.
Fraenkel, W. A. Blind retarded— or retarded blind. New
Outlook for the Blind, 1964, 5£, 165-170,
Germans, J. J., & Pavlik, W. B, Autonomic correlates of
acquisition and extinction. Psychonomic Science,
1964, 1, 109-110.
Goertzen, S. M. Speech and the mentally retarded child.
American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1957, 62,
244-253.
Greaves, J. R. Helping the retarded blind. International
Journal for the Education of the Blind, 1953, 2,
163-164.
121
Green, M. R., & Schecter, D. E. Autistic and symbiotic
disorders in three blind children. Psychiatric
Quarterly, 1957, .31, 628-646.
Gruber, K. F., & Moor, P. M. No place to go. New York:
American Foundation for the Blind, 1963.
Guess, D. Mental retardation and blindness: A complex
and relatively unexplored dyad. Exceptional
Children, 1967, 33 (7), 67-86.
Guess, D., & Rutherford, G. Experimental attempts to
produce stereotyping among blind retardates.
American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1967, 71,
984-986.
Haggard, E. A. On the application of analysis of vari
ance to GSR data: I. The selection of an
appropriate measure. Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 1949, 39^ 378-392.
Hallenbeck, J. Pseudo-retardation in retrolental fibro
plasia. New Outlook for the Blind, 1954, 48,
301-307,
Hamilton, R. E. The research program of the National
Health Research Unit, 1955. A Special Census of
Suspected Referral Mental Retardation, Onondaga
County, New York. Technical Report of the Mental
Health Research Unit. Syracuse University Press.
Heber, R., & others. Bibliography of world literature on
mental retardation. Washington, D. C.: United
States Department of Health, Education and Wel
fare, 1962.
Helper, M., et al. Electrodermal reactivity and related
behavior in emotionally disturbed children.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1963,
86, 600.
Henderson, R. A. Teaching the multiply handicapped
retarded child. Exceptional Children, 1960, 27,
90-92.
122
Hepfinger, L. M. Psychological evaluation of young blind
children. New Outlook for the Blind, 1962, 56,
309-316.
Huffman, M. B. Let's make life and words meaningful to
them. international Journal for the Education of
the Blind, December, 1958, £, 168-175.
Irwin, R. B. The recognition and training of blind
feeble-minded children. Outlook for the Blind,
1915, 9_, 29-32.
Jones, H. E. The GSR as related to overt emotional
expression. American Journal of Psychology,
1935' iZ' 241*
Kaufman, M. E., & Levitt, H. A study of three stereo
typed behaviors in institutionalized mental
defectives. American Journal of Mental Deficiency,
1965, 69, 467-473.
Kelleher, R. T,, & Gollub, L. R. A review of positive
conditional reinforcement. Journal of Experi
mental Analytical Behavior, 1962, £ (supplement),
543-597.
Kerlinger, F. N. Foundations of behavioral research.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965.
Krasner, L., 6 Ullmann, L. P. Case studies in behavior
modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Win
ston, 1965,
Lacy, O. L., & Siegel, P. S. An analysis of the unit of
measurement of the Galvanic Skin Response. Jour
nal of Experimental Psychology, 1949, 39, 122-
127.
Lohmann, Werner, & Moskowitz, I. The orienting reflex
as a measure of attention in mentally retarded
patients. Unpublished study done at Pacific
State Hospital, Pomona, Calif., 1966.
123
Long, P. L., & Perry, M. D. Slow learner and retarded
blind child. 43rd Biennial Convention, American
Association of Instructors of the Blind, 1956.
Lovaas, O. I., et al. Establishment of social reinforcers
in two schizophrenic children on the basis of
food. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,
1966,J_, 109-125.
Luria, A. R. The mentally retarded child. Oxford:
Pergamon Press, 1963.
Luria, A. R.f & Vinogradova, O. S. An objective investi
gation of the dynamics of semantic systems.
British Journal of Psychology, 1959, 50^, 89-105.
Lynn, R. Attention, arousal and the orientation reaction.
Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1966.
Maltzman, I., & Raskin, D. C. Effects of individual
differences in the orienting reflex on condition
ing and complex processes. Journal of Experi
mental Research in Personality, 1965, 1_, 1-16.
Maruszewski, M. [On the interaction of the two signal
systems in orienting reactions.] Voprosy.
Psikhol., 3 (1), 78-87.
Maruszewski, M. In R. Lynn, Attention, arousal, and the
orienting reaction. London: Pergamon Press, 1966.
Mason, W. A. Socially mediated reduction in emotional
responses of young rhesus monkeys. Journal of
Abnormal Social Psychology, 1960, 6£, 100-104.
Massachusetts Special Unpaid Commission Relative to Blind
Feebleminded, Blind Epileptic, and Blind Feeble
minded Epileptic Persons. Report. Boston:
Wright, Potter Printing Co., 1946,
Miner, L. E. A study of the incidence of speech devia
tions among visually handicapped children. New
Outlook for the Blind, 1963, 57, 10-14.
124
Moor, P. M. The preschool blind child, his needs and
resources* In G. L. Abel (Ed.), Concerning the
education of blind children. Educational Series
No. 12. New York: American Foundation for the
Blind, 1959.
Moor, P. M. Blind children with developmental problems.
Children, 1961, 8, 9-13.
National Association for Retarded Children. Survey on
Blind Retarded Children. New York: Author, 1960.
National Society for the Prevention of Blindness, Inc.
Estimated statistics on blindness and vision
problems. New York: Author, 1966.
Nies, R. The orienting reflex as conceptually distinct
from drive. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of California, Los Angeles, 1963.
Nisson, H. W. Individuality in the behavior of chimpan
zees. American Anthropologist, 1956, 5£, 407-413.
Norris, M., Spaulding, P. J., & Brodie, F. H. Blindness
in children. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1957.
O'Connor, N., 6 Venables, P. H. A note on the basal level
of skin conductance and Binet IQ. British
Journal of Psychology, 1956, 47, 148.
Oswald, C. Falling asleep open-eyed during intense
rhythmic stimuli. British Medical Journal, 1960,
1, 1450.
Paraskove, P. C. A survey of the facilities for the men
tally retarded blind in the United States.
International Journal for the Education of the
Blind, 1959, 8, 139-149.
Pavlov, I. P. Conditioned reflexes. Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1927.
Pillsbury, W. B. The psychology of reasoning. New York:
Appleton, 1910.
Pryer, R. S., & Ellis, N. R. Skin conductance and auto
nomic lability as a function of intelligence in
mental defectives. American Journal of Mental
Deficiency, 1959, £3, 835,
Razran, G, The observable unconscious in the inferable
conscious in current Soviet psychophysiology:
Interoceptive conditioning, semantic conditioning
and the orienting reflex. Psychological Review,
1961, 68, 81-147.
Rebish, D. A survey of the blind population at Pacific
State Hospital. Unpublished report, 1965.
Rigby, M. E. Some of the problems of the multiply handi
capped. International Journal for the Education
of the Blind, 1963, 12, 97-103.
Ripon, R. A comparative study of the development of
infants in an institution with those in low
socioeconomic homes. Psychological Bulletin,
1933, 30, 680-681.
Robinsin, J., & Gantt, W. H. The orienting reflex (ques
tioning reaction): cardiac, respiratory, salivary
and motor components. Johns Hopkins Hospital
Bulletin, 1947, 80, 253-321.
Root, F. K. Evaluation of services for multiple handi
capped blind children. International Journal for
the Education of the Blind, 1963, 13, 33-38.
Royer-Greaves School for the Blind Staff. Academic sub
jects for retarded blind children. International
Journal for the Education of the Blind, 1952, £,
84-88.
Sandler, A. Aspects of passivity and ego development in
the blind infant. In The psychoanalytic study of
the child. New York: International Universities
Press, 1963, 18, 343-359.
Scholl, G. What should be included in the curriculum for
the slow learner? St. Louis: American Associa
tion of Instructors of the Blind, 1950.
126
Seelye, W. P., & Thomas, J. E. Is mobility feasible with
multiply handicapped blind children? Exceptional
Children, 1966, 33 (5), 56-67.
Sokolov, Ye. N. Neuronal models and the orienting reflex.
In M. A. Brazier (Ed.), The central hervous
system and behavior. New York: J. Macy, 1960.
Sokolov, Ye. N. Perception and the conditioned reflex.
London: Pergamon Press, 1963.
Sokolov, Ye. N. Proceedings of conference on psychology.
(Diklady na sovesheh. popsikhologii.) Moscow,
1954. In Ye. N. Sokolov, Perception and the
conditioned reflex. London: Pergamon Press, 1963.
Spitz, R. A., & Wolf, K. M. Anaclitic depression: An
inquiry into the genesis of psychiatric conditions
in early childhood (11). New York: International
Universities Press, 1946.
Standish, R. R., & Champion, R. A. Task difficulty and
drive in verbal learning. Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 1960, !>9, 361-365.
Stichfield, S. M. Speech pathology. Magnolia, Mass.:
Expression Company, 1928.
Stone, A. A. Consciousness: Altered levels in blind
retarded children. Psychosomatic Medicine, 1964,
26, 14-19.
Streltsova, N. L. The characteristics of some uncondi
tioned reflexes in schizophrenics. In Proceed
ing of the All Union Theoretical-Practical Con
ference dedicated to the Centenary of S. S.
Korsakov and to Current Psychological Problems.
Moscow: Medgiz, 1955.
Strickland, H. Wherein lies our problem. St. Louis:
American Association of the Blind, Proceedings,
1946.
Strickland, H. Meeting the problems of social behavior of
retarded blind children. St. Louis: American
Association of Instructors of the Blind, 1950.
v
127
Tretakoff, M. I., & Farrell, M. J. Developing a curricu
lum for the blind retarded. American Journal of
Mental Deficiency, 1958, 62^ 610-615.
Venables, P. H. Some findings between PGR scores and
temperature and humidity. Journal of Experi
mental Psychology, 1955, 54, 12-18.
Venables, P. H., & Martin, I. A manual of psychophysio-
logical methods. New York: John Wiley, 1967.
Vinogradova, O. S. The orientation reaction and its
neurological mechanisms. Moscow: Academy of
Pedagogical Sciences, 1961. R.S.F.S.R.
Walsh, F. B. Blindness in an institution for the feeble
minded. Archives of Ophthalmology, 1963, 69,
1965.
Williams, D. Sunland's program for the blind. Mental
Retardation, 1964, 244-245.
Winer, B. Statistical principles in experimental design.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962.
Wolf, J. M. Multiple disabilities— an old problem with a.
new challenge. New Outlook for the Blind, 1965,
59, 265-271.
Woodworth, R. S., & Schlosberg, H. Experimental psychol
ogy. New York: Henry Holt, 1954,
Zimmerman, D. W. Sustained performance in rats based on
secondary reinforcement. Journal of Comparative
Physiological Psychology, 1959, 32,* 353-358.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Effects Of Success And Failure On Impulsivity And Distractibility Of Three Types Of Educationally Handicapped Children
PDF
Auditory Perceptual Si Factors As Non-Predictors Of Reading Achievement In An Upper-Class And Upper-Middle-Class Population
PDF
The Use Of The Orienting Reflex To Test The Zeaman And House Theory Of Attention
PDF
Effects Of Preschool Enrollment And Parent Participation On Academic Growth
PDF
The Modification Of Maladaptive Behavior Of A Class Of Educationally Handicapped Children By Operant Conditioning Techniques
PDF
Transfer Of The Partial Reinforcement Extinction Effect Across Tasks In Normal And Retarded Boys
PDF
Academic And Non-Academic Achievement Of Freshmen And Seniors At Azusa Pacific College
PDF
Maternal Child-Rearing Attitudes And Developmental Growth Of Rubella Deaf-Blind Children
PDF
An Experimental Study Of The Degree Of Affective Response Elicited By Several Mediated And Nonmediated Instructional Methods
PDF
The Effects Of Two Types Of Experimenter Intervention And Schedules Of Reinforcement On Verbal Operant Conditioning Of Affective Self-References
PDF
Effects Of Associative And Category Cuing On Recall Of Items From Exhaustive And Nonexhaustive Lists
PDF
Testing Attitudes Toward Physical Handicap: Stereotyping And Objectivityin A Partially Integrated Elementary Program
PDF
School Behavior And Attitudes Of Retarded And Average High School Boys Asconcomitants Of Intelligence And Socioeconomic Status
PDF
Prescriptive Teaching As A Supplement To Behavior Modification In The Remediation Of Learning Disorders
PDF
Confirmation Of Expectancy And Changes In Teachers' Evaluations Of Student Behaviors
PDF
The Visual Fusion Threshold (Vft) Test As A Measure Of Perceptual Efficiency In Kindergarten And First Grade, And As A Possible Predictor Of Later Reading Retardation
PDF
The Relative Efficiency Of Prompting And Confirmation Learning Paradigms
PDF
Value Orientations Of Parents Of Academically Successful And Unsuccessfulchildren
PDF
Psycho-Dynamic Development Problems In The Congenitally Blind
PDF
A Measurement Of Social Maturity For The Educable Mentally Retarded High School Student
Asset Metadata
Creator
Porter, William Harris
(author)
Core Title
The Conditioning Of A Discriminative Stimulus Measured As An Orienting Reaction In Profoundly Retarded Blind Children
Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Degree Program
Education
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
education, educational psychology,OAI-PMH Harvest
Language
English
Contributor
Digitized by ProQuest
(provenance)
Advisor
McIntrye, Robert B. (
committee chair
), Galbraith, Gary C. (
committee member
), Meyers, Charles Edward (
committee member
)
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-371641
Unique identifier
UC11361219
Identifier
6919393.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-371641 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
6919393.pdf
Dmrecord
371641
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Porter, William Harris
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA
Tags
education, educational psychology