Behavioral Principles in Communicative Disorders Applications To Assessment and Treatment 1st Edition Christine A. Maul

Behavioral Principles in
Communicative Disorders Applications

to Assessment and Treatment 1st
Edition Christine A. Maul
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/behavioral-principles-in-communicative-disorders-appl
ications-to-assessment-and-treatment-1st-edition-christine-a-maul/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
Opioid Use Disorders A Holistic Guide to Assessment

Treatment and Recovery 1st Edition Charles Atkins
https://ebookmeta.com/product/opioid-use-disorders-a-holistic-
guide-to-assessment-treatment-and-recovery-1st-edition-charles-
atkins/
Language Disorders a functional approach to assessment

and intervention in children 7th Edition Robert E.
Owens
https://ebookmeta.com/product/language-disorders-a-functional-
approach-to-assessment-and-intervention-in-children-7th-edition-
robert-e-owens/
Awakening Hope A Developmental Behavioral Biological

Approach to Codependency Treatment Mary Crocker Cook
https://ebookmeta.com/product/awakening-hope-a-developmental-
behavioral-biological-approach-to-codependency-treatment-mary-
crocker-cook/
Adult Deliberate Firesetting : Theory, Assessment, and

Treatment 1st Edition Theresa A. Gannon
https://ebookmeta.com/product/adult-deliberate-firesetting-
theory-assessment-and-treatment-1st-edition-theresa-a-gannon/
Introduction to Environmental Assessment: A Guide to
Principles and Practice 4th Edition Bram F. Noble
https://ebookmeta.com/product/introduction-to-environmental-
assessment-a-guide-to-principles-and-practice-4th-edition-bram-f-
noble/
Neuromuscular Disorders: Treatment and Management Tulio

E. Bertorini
https://ebookmeta.com/product/neuromuscular-disorders-treatment-
and-management-tulio-e-bertorini/
Cortical Visual Impairment An Approach to Assessment

and Intervention 2nd Edition Christine Roman-Lantzy
https://ebookmeta.com/product/cortical-visual-impairment-an-
approach-to-assessment-and-intervention-2nd-edition-christine-
roman-lantzy/
Treatment of Disorders in Childhood and Adolescence

Fourth Edition Mitchell J. Prinstein
https://ebookmeta.com/product/treatment-of-disorders-in-
childhood-and-adolescence-fourth-edition-mitchell-j-prinstein/
Suicide Assessment and Treatment Planning A Strengths

Based Approach 1st Edition Sommers-Flanagan
https://ebookmeta.com/product/suicide-assessment-and-treatment-
planning-a-strengths-based-approach-1st-edition-sommers-flanagan/
Communicative Disorders
Applications to Assessment and
Treatment
Communicative Disorders
Applications to Assessment and
Treatment
Christine A. Maul, PhD, CCC-SLP

Brooke R. Findley, MA, CCC-SLP, BCBA
Amanda Nicolson Adams, PhD, BCBA
5521 Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123
e-mail: info@pluralpublishing.com
Website: http://www.pluralpublishing.com
Copyright © by Plural Publishing, Inc. 2016
Typeset in 10.5/13 Palatino by Flanagan’s Publishing Services, Inc.

Printed in the United States of America by McNaughton & Gunn, Inc.
All rights, including that of translation, reserved. No part of this

publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
recording, or otherwise, including photocopying, recording, taping,
Web distribution, or information storage and retrieval systems
without the prior written consent of the publisher.
For permission to use material from this text, contact us by

Telephone: (866) 758-7251
Fax: (888) 758-7255
e-mail: permissions@pluralpublishing.com
Every attempt has been made to contact the copyright holders for
material originally printed in another source. If any have been
inadvertently overlooked, the publishers will gladly make the
necessary arrangements at the first opportunity..
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Maul, Christine A., author.
Behavioral principles in communicative disorders : applications to
assessment and treatment/Christine A. Maul, Brooke R. Findley,
Amanda Nicolson Adams.
p. ; cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-59756-788-6 (alk. paper) — ISBN 1-59756-788-4 (alk.
paper)
I. Findley, Brooke R., author. II. Adams, Amanda Nicolson, author.
III. Title.
[DNLM: 1. Communication Disorders — diagnosis. 2.
Communication Disorders —
therapy. 3. Behavior Control — methods. 4. Behavioral Symptoms. 5.
Behaviorism.
WM 475]
RC423
616.85'5 — dc23
2015029454
Contents
Preface
Contributors
Chapter 1. Introduction to Behaviorism

Why Should SLPs Learn the Principles of Behaviorism and How to
Apply Them?
Definition and History of Behaviorism
Principles of Behaviorism
Behavior Modification: The Early Days
Philosophical Underpinnings
Early Experimentation in Behavior Modification
Applied Behavior Analysis
Chapter Summary
Application Exercises
References
Chapter 2. Verbal Behavior

Frances Pomaville
Definition of Verbal Behavior
Acquisition of Verbal Behavior
Functional Units of Verbal Behavior
Autoclitics: The Behavioral Explanation of Rules of Grammar
Multiple Causation: Complex Verbal Operants
Implications for Assessment and Treatment of Communicative
Disorders
Chapter Summary
References
Chapter 3. Defining and Measuring Behaviors

Defining Behaviors
Measuring Behaviors
Graphing and Interpreting Measurement Data
Determining Baseline Measures
Chapter Summary
References
Chapter 4. Functional Behavior Assessment and Applications

to Communicative Disorders
Definition of Contingencies
A-B-C Contingencies
Definition and Purpose of Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA)
Questions FBA Seeks to Answer
Gathering Data
FBA: Applications to Verbal Behavior
Assessment of Verbal Operants
Chapter Summary
References
Chapter 5. Discrete Trial Teaching (DTT): A Framework

What Is a Discrete Trial?
Components of the Discrete Trial
Data Collection and Criterion Levels
Probe Procedures
Chapter Summary
References
Chapter 6. Teaching New Behaviors

Antecedent Manipulations
Shaping New Behaviors
Chaining: Forward and Backward
Positive Reinforcement: Delivering the Consequence for Desired
Responses
Negative Reinforcement
Chapter Summary
References
Chapter 7. Generalizing and Maintaining Behaviors

Stimulus Discrimination Versus Generalization
Types of Generalization
Techniques for Promoting Generalization During Treatment
Probing for Generalization in the Clinic Setting
Techniques to Promote Maintenance in Natural Settings
Chapter Summary
References
Chapter 8. Decreasing Undesirable Behaviors

Types of Undesirable Behavior for Reduction
Assessment of Undesirable Behaviors
Antecedent Interventions
A Clinical Definition of Punishment
Extinction
Differential Reinforcement
Chapter Summary
References
Chapter 9. Establishing the Evidence Base: Single-Case

Experimental Designs
What Is Science?
Formulating a Research Question
Scientific Experimentation Versus Routine Clinical Work
Characteristics of Single-Case Research Designs
Types of Single-Case Research Designs
External Validity in Single-Case Research
Chapter Summary
References
Chapter 10. Ethics in Scientific Research and Clinical

Practice
A Brief History of Ethical Issues in Scientific Research
The National Research Act of 1974 and the Belmont Report
The Distinction Between Scientific Research and Clinical Practice
Ethical Issues in Conducting Treatment
Chapter Summary
References
Glossary
Index
Preface
Welcome to Behavioral Principles in Communicative Disorders:

Applications to Assessment and Treatment. This book is an
uncommon text in that it bridges two disciplines in one practical,
application-focused volume. This interdisciplinary feature has shaped
a valuable and unique contribution to the current available selection
of textbooks for training in communicative disorders and in the field
of applied behavior analysis (ABA). The authors of this book have
presented information that is comprehensive while remaining
focused on the goal of being truly applied. The book is geared
toward speech-language pathologists (SLPs) but should also be
useful to professionals in other disciplines, such as ABA and special
education.
Therefore, this textbook can be considered an interdisciplinary
introduction to behavior analysis and contains more than enough
technical information to challenge even the most serious ABA
student, including those pursuing the credential of board certified
behavior analyst (BCBA). However, it is written primarily to speak to
those who are in training for a career in communicative disorders by
including examples relevant and pertinent to this discipline. In an
everchanging and increasingly interdisciplinary atmosphere, a
textbook of this kind is appropriate and timely.
The authors of this book represent this professional diversity both
in training and in specialized experience. The authors include two
doctoral-level SLPs, a doctoral-level BCBA, and a combination
SLP/BCBA. All authors have experience as university faculty (three in
communicative disorders, one in psychology), and all authors have
practical experience working in clinical settings in a variety of
capacities. Prior to entering the university setting, Christine A. Maul
served as an SLP in the public schools, with a specialty in serving
children and young adults with severe developmental and intellectual
disabilities. She has been a faculty member in the Department of
Communicative Disorders and Deaf Studies at California State
University, Fresno (CSUF) for 17 years, as a lecturer and currently as
an assistant professor. As part of her duties, she supervises students
performing clinical practicum at the CSUF Speech, Language, and
Hearing Clinic, where individuals across the life span with a wide
range of communicative disorders are served. Brooke R. Findley
serves as an SLP in a rural school district and part-time lecturer at
CSUF. After becoming an SLP, she recognized the value in pursuing
further education in the field of ABA and is currently also certified as
a behavior analyst. Her areas of professional interest include verbal
behavior, cultural and linguistic diversity, and educational leadership.
She is currently pursuing a doctoral degree in Educational
Leadership at CSUF. Amanda Adams started as a director for
agencies providing autism services and then served as the lead
behavior analyst for a large school district before accepting a faculty
position in the psychology department at CSUF. In her 8 years at
CSUF, she was the coordinator for the ABA master’s program and the
founder of the Fresno State autism center. She is now the CEO and
executive director of the California Autism Center. In addition,
another doctoral-level SLP, Frances Pomaville, also an assistant
professor at CSUF, stepped forward to write the chapter on verbal
behavior to help us meet our deadline. She did a thorough job with
a difficult topic, and we are grateful for her contribution. We would
also like to thank graduate student assistant Victoria Riley who gave
us much help in putting together the glossary.
The focus of this textbook is on behavioral principles derived from
learning theory, as discovered by the work of behavioral scientists,
chief among them B. F. Skinner. The authors admittedly share a
significant bias toward the behavioral viewpoint presented in this
text. Although we acknowledge the contributions of other
approaches, it was our intent in writing this text to present basic
behavioral principles and propose ways in which those principles can
effectuate positive change in communicative behaviors. It is not
within the scope of the text to thoroughly examine the great
theoretically oriented debates that have spun around behaviorism,
particularly the cognitive-linguistic versus the behavioral viewpoints.
Such theoretical discussion regarding other approaches is largely
omitted from this text due to our desire to maintain a clinically
oriented focus on behavioral principles.
We also acknowledge that bias against behaviorism still exists in
many modernday circles, although we find this to be unfortunate.
Criticisms regarding behaviorism were easier to understand before
the 1980s, before we had a body of research supporting the applied
extensions of the basic and theoretical work resulting from Skinner’s
research. In the 1960s, the use of behavioral techniques in applied
settings increased, improving outcomes in people with mental and
developmental disabilities. Then, in the 1970s and 1980s, the
methodology to empirically validate behavioral techniques
progressed, and the number of scientific publications demonstrating
the value of those techniques consequently increased. Currently, the
evidence supporting the application of behavioral principles to
effectuate change in human behavior is vast, and people seeking to
improve their communicative behaviors should have access to
treatment that incorporates those principles. In writing this textbook,
it was our intent to present material specifically focused on
empirically validated behavioral techniques that have shown efficacy
in enhancing clinicians’ skills and clients’ outcomes.
In addition to our advocacy for the science of behaviorism, we
also share a dedication to putting professional territorialism behind
us and embracing interdisciplinary collaboration to provide the best
evidence-based services possible to the people we serve. This is a
highly personal devotion among the authors of this book, one of
whom is the parent of a young man with autism and mental illness.
Participating in clinical intervention techniques not only as a
professional but also as a parent may be one of the most profound
ways of experiencing the importance of scientific collaboration in
maximizing outcomes for a loved one. This is a measure of success
that can be achieved only if theoretical turf battles are abandoned in
favor of interdisciplinary collaboration among professionals dedicated
to pursuing common goals within an evidencebased framework. Our
clinical fields are experiencing a shift, and professionals from
complimentary disciplines (SLP, school psychology, BCBA, special
education teachers, etc.) are working together more than ever
before. This is happening not only in public schools but also, to an
increasing degree, within the private sector. Being knowledgeable
about the valuable methods and techniques used by our colleagues
in neighboring fields of practice is extremely helpful in strengthening
our own practice as clinicians and, more important, will be of benefit
to the clients we serve. We hope that you find this book to be
challenging, informative, and useful in your professional growth and
clinical work.
— Amanda Nicolson Adams,

PhD, BCBA
California Autism Center,
Fresno, California
Contributors
Amanda Nicolson Adams, PhD, BCBA

CEO, Executive Director
California Autism Center and Learning Group
Fresno, California
Brooke R. Findley, MA, CCC-SLP, BCBA

Lecturer
Department of Communicative Disorders and Deaf Studies
California State University, Fresno
Fresno, California
Christine A. Maul, PhD, CCC-SLP

Assistant Professor
Fresno, California
Frances Pomaville, PhD, CCC-SLP

Assistant Professor and Speech-Language Pathologist
Fresno, California
Chapter 2
To M. N. Hegde
CHAPTER 1
Introduction to Behaviorism
Chapter Outline
Why Should SLPs Learn the Principles of Behaviorism and

How to Apply Them?
Early Behavioral Scientists
Pavlov (1849–1936)
Watson (1878–1958)
B. F. Skinner (1904–1990)
Operant Conditioning and Respondent Conditioning
Positive and Negative Reinforcement
Positive and Negative Punishment
Stimulus Discrimination and Generalization
Definition of ABA
Who Are Board Certified Behavior Analysts (BCBAs)?
How Can SLPs and BCBAs Collaborate?
Why Should SLPs Learn the Principles of Behaviorism and
How to Apply Them?
Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) are in the business of changing

communicative behaviors in the clients that they serve. SLPs seek to
establish new communicative behaviors in their clients, rehabilitate
communicative behaviors that may have been lost, strengthen and
maintain existing communicative behaviors, and, often
simultaneously, decrease communicative behaviors that are
undesirable. SLPs are ethically charged to engage in evidence-based
practice to achieve these goals, taking into consideration scientific
evidence reported in peer-reviewed journals, the preferences of their
clients, and their own clinical expertise (American Speech-Language-
Hearing Association, 2005). The well-researched principles of
behaviorism, therefore, are highly relevant to the field of speech-
language pathology because it is a science that has resulted in an
evidence-based, systematic set of methods applied to modify the
behaviors of others. On that basis alone, it is beneficial for SLPs to
have knowledge of those methods and understand how they can be
applied in the assessment and treatment of their clients. However,
there are other good reasons why SLPs should know and apply
principles of behaviorism.
SLPs are ethically charged to engage in _______-_______

______________.
Clients served by SLPs often present with accompanying

behavioral difficulties. In the adult population, behavior problems are
a frequently occurring effect of stroke and traumatic brain injury
(TBI). Also, the comorbidity of speech-language difficulties and
social emotional behavior disorders (SEBDs) in children has been
well documented. It has been reported that 21.6% of the child and
adolescent populations in the United States exhibit behaviors that
warrant the diagnosis of some type of psychiatric disorder (Carter et
al., 2010). Among children who are diagnosed with language
disorders, there is a much higher prevalence of SEBD; estimates by
various researchers range between 50% and 70% (Redmond & Rice,
1998). Therefore, SLPs working in all settings are likely to encounter
behavioral difficulties in a significant percentage of the clients they
attempt to help. Often behavior problems must be addressed before
clients can fully benefit from treatment.
It is also becoming increasingly likely for SLPs to be asked to take
part in collaborative, multidisciplinary efforts to help children
overcome behavioral difficulties that may impede their access to
educational curriculum (Bopp, Brown, & Mirenda, 2004). In
particular, SLPs may be called upon to work closely with board
certified behavior analysts (BCBAs) who are experts in discovering
and describing problem behaviors in children and adults and then
writing behavior plans to address those problems. BCBAs have
special expertise in applied behavior analysis (ABA), a systematic
set of methods designed to discover aspects of a person’s
environment that contribute to problem behavior through
functional behavior assessment (FBA). In addition, BCBAs are
experts in applying ABA principles to build and shape new behaviors
that may be nonexistent or deficient in clients who do not
necessarily exhibit problem behaviors. SLPs can therefore collaborate
with BCBAs in assisting clients with a wide range of communicative
difficulties, with or without accompanying behavior disorders. This
chapter ends with a further discussion of the origin of applied
behavior analysis and professional collaboration between SLPs and
BCBAs.
Clients with behavioral difficulties will benefit from collaboration

between SLPs and _______-_______ ______________
______________.
Finally, although principles of ABA are more closely associated
with assessment and intervention for children with autism and other
severe disabilities, those principles have much broader application to
the entire gamut of types of communicative disorders, levels of
severity, and behaviors that simply interfere with the delivery of
therapy. SLPs who understand the principles of ABA can address
problems as critical as helping a nonverbal individual obtain a system
of communication to as mild as helping a child stay in seat during
therapy.
In summary, SLPs should learn and apply principles of
behaviorism because (a) there is a well-established evidence base
for the efficacy of methods based on behaviorism, (b) many clients
on SLPs’ caseloads are likely to exhibit challenging behaviors, (c)
there is an increasing need for SLPs to collaborate with BCBAs in
providing assessment and intervention for children with behavior
disorders, and (d) the principles of behaviorism are broadly
applicable across types and levels of severity of communicative
disorders.
Behaviorism as a philosophy is grounded in the principles of

empiricism and determinism. These principles are not compatible
with mentalism, another widely held philosophy that emphasizes
assumed internal processes such as thought and perception as the
key to understanding why human beings behave the way they do.
Empiricism is the belief that knowledge can be derived only from
sensory experiences — from that which can be seen, heard,
touched, tasted, or smelled. Therefore, direct observation is
inextricably necessary in establishing a knowledge base. It is a well-
founded principle of behaviorism that human behavior must be
defined in terms of that which can be observed and measured. For
example, it is not acceptable to a behaviorist to describe a behavior
as an internal emotional event, such as joy. A behaviorist would
instead describe and quantify behaviors that might indicate the
person is joyful, such as smiling, laughing, jumping up and down, or
making cheering noises.
Empiricists also do not accept an idea simply because it appears
to be logical, well argued, or coherent. They insist on putting ideas
to the empirical test, a scientific experiment arranged to directly
experience the truth or untruth of a statement or hypothesis.
Principles of behaviorism have been thoroughly examined through
empirical research, most often utilizing single-case research design
methodology, which is described in more depth in Chapter 9.
The belief that knowledge can be derived only from sensory

experiences is called ______________.
Determinism is the belief that nothing that happens in the world

is haphazard. Determinists believe that there is a systematic order in
which phenomena relate to each other. Every effect has a cause, and
it is possible through scientific experimentation to discover,
understand, and exert control over a cause-effect relationship.
The belief that every effect has a cause is called

______________.
The philosophical concepts of empiricism and determinism

demand explanations of human behavior that cannot be derived
from a mentalistic viewpoint. Mentalism is the belief that humans act
the way they do because of internal, unobservable phenomena, such
as mind, thought, and free will. There are a myriad of other
hypothetical constructs that mentalistic authors have set forth. Freud
(1949), for example, described id, ego, and super ego as the prime
determinants of human behavior. Chomsky (1965) proposed an
internal language acquisition device (LAD) as the mechanism by
which children acquire language. Modern-day authors have proposed
many models showing how the brain processes information in much
the same way as a computer does without the neurological data to
prove such processes (e.g., Schyns, Gosslin, & Smith, 2009). All of
these are examples of hypothetical constructs that do not lend
themselves to observation and measurement and therefore cannot
be subjected to empirical testing. Behavioral scientists therefore
argue that, although such constructs may be a part of the human
experience, they do not contribute much to a functional
understanding of why human beings behave the way they do.
The belief that humans act the way they do because of internal,
unobservable phenomena is called ______________.
Early Behavioral Scientists
Behavioral principles have been in operation since the beginning of

the history of humankind. In response to the conditions of their
environments, humans learn to seek shelter when it is cold, to hunt
and to farm in order to obtain food, to run in times of danger, to
swim instead of drown, and so forth. Parents teach their children by
praising them when they are behaving in a desirable way and by
punishing them when they are not. People repeat behaviors that
result in rewards such as a paycheck from a boss, a kiss from a
spouse, a hug from a child, or a smile from a friend.
Although these are everyday occurrences that are taken for
granted by the general public, the way in which behavioral principles
shape our lives was not fully described or understood until scientists
began to systematically study how living organisms respond to
environmental stimuli. Three scientists who contributed to the
founding of behavioral science were Ivan Pavlov (1849–1936), John
B. Watson (1878–1958), and B. F. Skinner (1904–1990).
Pavlov (1849–1936)
To understand Pavlov’s pioneering work, it is necessary to distinguish

between an unconditioned stimulus, which elicits an
unconditioned response, and a conditioned stimulus, which elicits
a conditioned response. Unconditioned stimuli automatically elicit an
unconditioned response; living organisms, including human beings,
react to certain stimuli in certain ways from birth, and those
reactions persist throughout the life span. For example, the
presentation of good food elicits salivation, touching a hot plate
elicits a rapid removal of the hand, experiencing pain elicits
moaning, pollen in the air elicits sneezing, and so forth. In each of
these examples, there is an unconditioned stimulus (such as pollen)
and an unconditioned response (such as sneezing).
Pavlov established that it is possible to elicit an unconditioned
response to neutral stimuli that do not ordinarily elicit such a
response. In his classic experiments, he presented a variety of
neutral stimuli, most famously the sound of a bell, prior to the
presentation of food to a dog. The food, the unconditioned stimulus,
elicited the dog’s salivation. However, after repeated pairings of the
bell tone with presentation of the food, the dog salivated upon
hearing the bell. At that point, the tone became a conditioned
stimulus and the dog’s salivation became a conditioned
response (Figure 1–1).
Pairing a neutral stimulus to an unconditioned stimulus to
eventually elicit an unconditioned response by presentation of the
neutral stimulus alone is currently referred to as respondent
conditioning. “Pavlov’s dog” became an icon for the establishment of
a set of behavioral techniques based on respondent conditioning,
which, when applied ethically, can help people overcome irrational
fears, such as fear of flying, or cease undesirable habits, such as
smoking or excessive alcohol consumption. This type of respondent
conditioning, also called Pavlovian or classical conditioning, has
limited application to the treatment of communicative disorders.
However, Display Box 1–1 shows an example of the importance of
understanding the concept of respondent conditioning.
Watson (1878–1958)
Watson was the mentalist’s biggest foe. He soundly denounced the

idea that scientific inquiry in the field of psychology should be
concerned with unobservable mental states (e.g., thought, mood,
dreams, theoretical constructs of consciousness, etc.). He proposed
instead that studies be conducted solely to discover the causes of
observable behavior, with the ultimate goal of devising methods by
which human behavior can be predicted and controlled. His ideas
formed the foundation for behaviorism as a purely objective natural
science leading to understanding the relationships between
environmental stimuli and responses of living organisms to those
stimuli.
Figure 1–1. The process of respondent conditioning.
Display Box 1–1. Keep Those White Coats in the Closet!
Although respondent conditioning has little application to the

treatment of communicative disorders, it is beneficial for
clinicians to understand how people can have reflexive,
conditioned reactions to stimuli that would not ordinarily
elicit such reactions. For example, fear responses from a
child may be elicited by a clinician wearing a white lab coat.
Previous trips to the doctor’s office, in which people often
wearing white coats administer vaccinations, may have
conditioned the children to react in such a manner. Similarly,
the mere sight of a tongue depressor may elicit a backward
jerk of the head or even a gag reflex in clients who have
previously experienced oral facial examinations.
Based on the schematic given in Figure 1–1, identify the
unconditioned stimuli and the unconditioned responses,
leading to the conditioned stimuli and conditioned responses
described here.
Watson was a colorful character with strong opinions that led him
in various directions, most notably into animal behavior, childrearing,
and marketing. In his most controversial experiment, he applied the
Pavlovian principle of respondent conditioning to an 11-month-old
child, dubbed “Little Albert,” presenting a furry little white rat to the
child simultaneously with the disturbingly loud noise of an iron rod
clanging (Watson & Rayner, 1920). Albert had exhibited no previous
fear of the rat, but he understandably reacted with fear to the clang
of the iron rod. After several simultaneous presentations of the two
stimuli, the child began to exhibit fearful reactions to the
presentation of the rat alone and also to other animals and objects
that had any kind of resemblance to the rat. Thus, Watson proved
that fear could be a conditioned response that could generalize to
related objects. Watson did not attempt to de-condition Little Albert,
and because the little boy died at the age of 6 from hydrocephalus,
it was not possible to determine what effect this experiment might
have had on his life. This type of experimentation, coupled with
Watson’s penchant for strongly worded hyperbolic statements,
discredited him and the newly proposed science of behaviorism in
the eyes of many. Display Box 1–2 presents one of Watson’s most
controversial statements.
Display Box 1–2. Watson’s “Dozen Infants” Quote
Watson wrote in the area of childrearing, advocating for a

type of emotionally detached style of parenting in which
children would be regarded and treated as young adults. He
was so convinced of the possibilities of molding children
through control of environmental stimuli that he went so far
as to propose a 20-year moratorium on pregnancies to give
behavioral scientists time to gather data to propose the most
efficient way to raise children. One of his most widely quoted
statements (Watson, 1928) indicated his fervent belief in the
power of behavioral parenting:
Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own
specified world to bring them up in, and I’ll guarantee to take any
one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I
might select — doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief and, yes, even
beggar-man and thief. (p. 104)
For more information on Watson’s writings on childrearing,

refer to Houk (2000).
In the Little Albert experiment, what were the unconditioned

stimulus, the neutral stimulus, and the unconditioned response?
What eventually became the conditioned stimulus and the
conditioned response?
B. F. Skinner (1904–1990)
Behaviorism as a science did not exist until B. F. Skinner addressed

human behavior as observable, measurable events that could be
explained through discovery of the causes of those behaviors.
Through his experiments with laboratory animals, mostly rats and
pigeons, Skinner discovered patterns of behavior caused by
responses to environmental stimuli. He devised the Skinner box,
although Skinner did not like the term Skinner box to describe the
device he invented. He preferred terms such as lever box or operant
conditioning chamber. Figure 1–2 provides a schematic of a Skinner
box.
The Skinner box was a cage containing a lever that, when
pressed, would dispense a morsel of food. A rat running around the
cage would eventually accidentally depress the lever — a behavior
that was rewarded, or reinforced, by the presentation of food.
Skinner observed that the rat’s lever-pressing behavior would then
increase, as a result of having received the food. This learning
process, in which a behavior is increased through a reinforcing
event, is one component of what Skinner called operant
conditioning. This was but one of many principles of behaviorism
established through this type of experimental manipulation of
antecedent and consequence events causing a change in animal
behavior.
Figure 1–2. The Skinner box.

The learning process in which a behavior is increased through a
reinforcing event is one component of what Skinner called
______________ ______________.
Through many and repeated experiments, Skinner demonstrated

patterns of animal behavior that are considered foundational
principles of behaviorism. These broad principles are briefly
described here. In later chapters, these principles are discussed in
more detail and applications to clinical practice, with examples, are
given.
Operant Conditioning and Respondent Conditioning
Operant conditioning is the primary process through which

Skinner believed people learn to behave the way that they do.
Through operant conditioning, behavior is shaped and maintained by
the consequences that immediately follow the behavior.
Consequences alter the frequency of the occurrence of behavior
either by increasing the behavior through reinforcement or
decreasing, or often entirely eliminating, a behavior through
punishment. From birth, human beings encounter a myriad of
consequences on the way to becoming persons who behave the way
they do. A small infant may curl his lips in a reflexive response to
passing gas, but the attention adults in the environment shower
upon him quickly results in the infant learning the social smile — an
example of reinforcement. A toddler may reach up to touch a hot
stove burner and may either experience the pain that comes from
touching it or be saved by a sharp “No!” and redirection from his
parent, resulting in decreased or eliminated stove-top touching — an
example of punishment.
Operant conditioning is distinguished from respondent
conditioning, because the behaviors that are learned through
operant conditioning are a result of an individual’s previous
interactions and exposure to consequences, while behaviors elicited
through respondent conditioning are reflexive (recall Pavlov’s
experiment with the salivating dog). Respondent behaviors occur
because of past associations that people have made with antecedent
events. A particular song that was sung at a loved one’s funeral may
elicit crying behavior whenever a person hears it in the future. The
sight of a particular breed of dog may cause a person’s heart to race
if he or she has been bitten by that breed in the past. Operant
behaviors, on the other hand, are nonreflexive behaviors learned
through past encounters with consequences. Reflexive behaviors
elicited through respondent conditioning are few and finite, while
responsive behaviors evoked through operant conditioning are many
and infinitely varied.
The process by which behavior is shaped and maintained through

consequences that immediately follow the behavior and alter the
frequency of the occurrence of the behavior is called
______________ ______________.
Positive and Negative Reinforcement
The observation that specific animal behaviors could be increased

through presentation of food immediately after the performance of
the behavior established the principle of reinforcement, the
process of strengthening and increasing the frequency of a behavior.
A reinforcer is an event that follows a behavior and results in
increasing that behavior. There are many different types of
reinforcers, and an event that may be reinforcing to one person may
not be reinforcing to another. A young child who loves art might
work hard to gain access to the opportunity to paint, while a child
who loves sports might not find that activity to be desirable and will
not work to gain access to it.
The process of strengthening and increasing a behavior is called

______________.
An event that follows a behavior and results in increasing that

behavior is called a ______________.
Behaviors increase through positive reinforcement or

negative reinforcement. The concept of positive reinforcement is
straightforward and easy to understand. Positive reinforcement
occurs when a reinforcer is presented right after a behavior has
occurred, resulting in the increase of that behavior. For example, if
an adolescent mows the lawn at home and his parent presents him
with a plate of warm, fresh-baked cookies as a reward right after
he’s finished, his lawn-mowing behavior is likely to increase because
that behavior has been positively reinforced. Positive reinforcement,
then, has to do with the presentation of a stimulus.
Positive reinforcement has to do with stimulus ______________.
Negative reinforcement is harder to understand and is often

confused with punishment, which, as will soon be explained, is not
at all the same as negative reinforcement. Remember that the
process of reinforcement serves to increase a behavior. Negative
reinforcement increases a behavior by removing or postponing an
event that a person finds to be aversive. People seek to escape from
situations they find to be unpleasant or avoid them altogether.
Behaviors that allow them to escape or avoid an unpleasant situation
are likely to be repeated, as a result of negative reinforcement. For
example, if cold air is blowing into a house, a person is likely to shut
the window. The cold air is blocked, or removed, and the window-
shutting behavior has been negatively reinforced. Turning down the
volume on a radio blasting loud music is a negatively reinforced
behavior, as is taking an aspirin to relieve headache pain. Negative
reinforcement, then, has to do with the withdrawal of a stimulus
following a person’s behavior that results in escape or avoidance of
an aversive, or unpleasant, situation.
Negative reinforcement has to do with stimulus

______________.
The difference between positive and negative reinforcement

might be further explained by looking again at the illustration of the
Skinner box. When the caged rat depressed the lever and
immediately received food, he was positively reinforced through the
presentation of the food stimulus, and his lever-pressing behavior
increased. Notice, however, that the floor of the Skinner box
consisted of an electric grid. Skinner ran another set of experiments
in which he introduced a steady electric current along this grid that
could be interrupted by depressing the lever. The rats in these
experiments understandably found the induced electric shock to be
highly aversive and quickly learned to depress the lever to cause the
cessation of the electric current. In this case, the lever-pressing
behavior was negatively rein-forced through the withdrawal of a
stimulus, the electric shock.
The principle of reinforcement is not dependent upon subjective
feelings. For example, a boss may deliver warm verbal praise to a
frequently late employee who arrives to work on time one day, and
they both may have pleasant feelings about giving and receiving that
praise. However, if the employee’s behavior of being punctual does
not increase, then no matter how well both the boss and the
employee might feel about the praise, it is not reinforcing the
employee’s punctual behavior, and the boss should find some other
way to address the problem. Remember that inherent in the
description of a reinforcer is that it results in the increase of the
behavior; if it does not, then it cannot be considered to be a
reinforcer.
Also, the principle of reinforcement applies to all behaviors, both
desirable and undesirable. If an adolescent, for example, is given
praise and acceptance by his peers for smoking, and as a result his
smoking behavior increases, then the smoking behavior has been
reinforced. Similarly, if parents cannot help but laugh when a toddler
utters a naughty word, then that may serve as a reinforcer for the
utterance of the naughty word, and the toddler will gleefully repeat
it.
Differential reinforcement occurs when only a specified response is

reinforced and another specified response is given no reinforcement.
For example, let us suppose a parent is fed up with a 4-year-old’s
whiney voice. The wise parent might choose to withhold
reinforcement from the child when the child is using the whiney
voice, but the moment a child uses a more well-modulated voice,
the parent warmly says, “Oh! What a nice big girl voice!” and pays
attention to what the child is saying. If this is done consistently, the
frequency of the production of the whiny voice will be extinguished,
or eliminated, and production of the more well-modulated voice will
increase.
The appropriate application of the principle of differential
reinforcement would serve to increase a desirable behavior through
reinforcement and decrease an undesirable behavior by withholding
reinforcement. However, recall that principles of behaviorism apply
across all behaviors, desirable or undesirable. So, for example, if a
child is being raised in a household in which finishing homework
behavior is not reinforced but watching television is, the child will
learn to not complete homework assignments and to join the family
in front of the television instead. When applied appropriately,
however, differential reinforcement is an effective technique and is
discussed further in Chapter 8 on decreasing undesirable behaviors.
Differential reinforcement occurs when a specified response is

______________ and another specified response is
______________.
Positive and Negative Punishment
The word punishment is fraught with unsavory connotations to

most people. It may bring up images of spankings, harsh words,
restraints, solitary confinement, and so forth. In some areas of the
United States, the word no longer is applied to procedures necessary
to address behavior problems in school children. Similarly, advocates
for the disabled have fought against the use of punishment in the
treatment of behavioral disorders in people with developmental
disability and/or mental illness.
However, in the clinical sense of the word, punishment simply
means that some contingency placed on a behavior has resulted in a
decrease of a specified behavior. This is the critical difference
distinguishing punishment from negative reinforcement — two terms
that are often confused. Punishment results in the decrease of a
behavior; negative reinforcement results in the increase of a
behavior.
Negative reinforcement results in a behavior ______________.
Punishment results in a behavior ______________.
Just as in the principle of reinforcement, there is positive

punishment and negative punishment. Positive punishment
occurs when a stimulus is delivered right after a behavior is
exhibited and results in the decreased frequency of that behavior.
For example, if a young child starts to run into the street, a parent
might speak very sharply, saying, “No! Do not run into the street
without looking both ways!” If the child’s behavior of impulsively
running into the street is decreased, or hopefully ceases altogether,
then the parent’s sharp words have served as positive punishment.
Presentation of a stimulus right after a behavior is exhibited that
results in a decrease of that behavior is positive punishment.
Positive punishment involves stimulus ______________.
Negative punishment occurs when a stimulus that is present in a

person’s environment is withdrawn right after a behavior is
exhibited, again resulting in a decreased occurrence of that behavior.
For example, if two siblings are sitting in front of the television set,
watching their favorite show, and start fighting with each other, a
parent might go over and turn off the television. If withdrawing the
television show results in a decrease in fighting behavior, then that
behavior has been negatively punished. Withdrawing a stimulus right
after a behavior is exhibited, if it results in the decrease of that
behavior, is negative punishment.
Negative punishment involves stimulus ______________.
Again, just as in the principle of reinforcement, punishment is not

dependent upon subjective feelings. An event might appear to be
punishing, but if it does not result in the decrease of a behavior,
then it is not. For example, a teacher might feel that making
students who misbehave during recess stand against the fence is a
punishment (a type of negative punishment called time-out, which is
discussed further in Chapter 8). However, if the same students end
up standing against the fence every recess, then the misbehavior is
not decreasing, and isolating them in that way cannot be said to be
punishment. Remember that inherent in the definition of a punisher
is that it results in the decrease of a behavior; if it does not, then it
cannot be called a punisher.
Stimulus Discrimination and Generalization
Stimulus discrimination and stimulus generalization are two opposite

concepts. Discrimination occurs when a response is given to a
specific discriminative stimulus, annotated SD, because the
response has been given past reinforcement in the presence of that
stimulus. The ringing of a telephone, for example, is an SD for
picking up the phone behavior. A red light is an SD for stopping the
car behavior. An outstretched hand is an SD for handshaking
behavior.
Stimulus generalization, on the other hand, occurs when the
same response is given in the presence of stimuli that are similar to
the antecedent SD but are not entirely the same. For example, a
toddler may say the word ball when presented with a big rubber ball
at home but quickly learns that that response is also reinforced
when he says the word ball in the presence of basketballs, tennis
balls, soccer balls, baseballs, and so forth.
For various reasons, sometimes people fail to appropriately
discriminate and generalize. The toddler, for example, who learns to
call his mother “Mommy” but then applies that word to every woman
he meets has not yet learned that only his own mommy is the SD
that should evoke that title. Similarly, a child who learns the word
dog in reference to the family pet but fails to produce the word in
the presence of any other dog has failed to properly generalize. Also,
sometimes when children learn a new grammatical structure, they
may overgeneralize, producing such charming errors as foots or
eated.
A toddler who calls all women “Mommy” has failed to
appropriately ______________.
A child who names only the family pet as a dog, but no other dog
is so named has failed to appropriately ______________.
Behavioral principles are embedded in the everyday lives of human

beings. Behavioral scientists did not invent behavioral principles;
they simply discovered them through repeated, well-constructed
experiments. People alter their behavior in response to countless
day-to-day encounters with various stimuli that serve to either
reinforce or punish. These principles, in other words, are in
operation whether or not the environment is deliberately
manipulated by a person to cause a change in the behavior of
another person.
Having discovered the principles, however, behavioral scientists
went quite a bit further in investigating ways in which human
behavior could be modified, not by chance encounter of
consequences in the natural environment, but by purposeful
manipulation of the environment. Through repeated
experimentation, a set of methods emerged that came to be called
behavior modification; the application of well-researched,
empirically based principles of behaviorism by a person or persons to
either increase or decrease a specified human behavior in another
person. Early behavioral scientists emphasized the importance of
defining behaviors in terms that could be observed and measured,
subsequently addressing those behaviors through behavior
modification procedures, and keeping track of progress through
careful collection of data.
It was believed that, if best applied, behavior modification should
increase behaviors considered to be desirable and decrease
behaviors considered to be undesirable, therefore resulting in an
increased quality of life for the person undergoing treatment. The
worthiness of such goals would appear to be above reproach;
however, behavior modification generated quite a bit of controversy
in the early days, the residue of which still exists to some extent in
the present day. Controversy regarding the application of behavior
modification was centered on at least two factors: (a) the sometimes
hyperbolic expression of the philosophical underpinnings of
behaviorism, which was often at odds with cherished beliefs held by
many, and (b) the nature of early experimentation to establish
behavior modification procedures.
“Behaviorism is not the science of human behavior; it is the

philosophy of that science” (Skinner, 1974, p. 3). What follows is a
necessarily brief and simplified explanation of some of the
philosophical underpinnings that came to be associated with
behaviorism, often creating much controversy. For a deeper
understanding, readers are encouraged to read the original sources,
because Skinner was not just a scientist — he was a prolific and
eloquent writer.
Skinner’s explanations of the philosophy of behaviorism directly
challenged beliefs embedded in American tradition — belief in
concepts such as freedom, free will, human dignity, and religious
belief. He denied the cherished notion that humankind is capable of
exercising free will to change the world, stating, “A person does not
act upon the world, the world acts upon him” (Skinner, 1971, p.
202). The quest for freedom was explained by the concept of
negative reinforcement; revolutions occurred because human beings
sought to escape from aversive conditions, not because they were
motivated by “a will to be free” (Skinner, 1971, p. 39). Human
dignity was described as dependent upon giving credit to a person
for something he or she has done. More credit is given when human
accomplishments are believed to have no definite cause — when a
person’s behavior is attributed only to that person and not to some
identifiable cause. Therefore, Skinner argued against the concept of
human dignity as discouraging to developing an understanding of
the causes of human behavior. Finally, Skinner was an atheist, and,
for many, behaviorism was linked to arguments against the existence
of God. Display Box 1–3 presents a quote from Skinner on the
origins of his atheism. For a more thorough understanding of
Skinner’s controversial, but well-considered, viewpoints, refer to his
book, Beyond Freedom and Dignity (1971).
Skinner believed that the implementation of his ideas would
result in a much improved world. He lived during a time when grave
concerns were just emerging regarding overpopulation, the threat of
nuclear war, and the pollution of our environment. He pointed out
that the ills of our society could not be addressed through
technological advancements — humankind was the source of the
world’s problems, and until the behavior of humans changed, little
could be accomplished in moving human society forward. He
therefore called for a “behavioral technology” — the application of
behavioral principles to create a society in which humankind could
live in harmony with their environment and with each other (Skinner,
1971, p. 3). He called for a better way to change humankind other
than through the usual punishments society metes out — corporal
punishment, imprisonment, and so forth. If it is accepted that
human behavior is controlled by the environment, then it should be
possible to create an environment that would not evoke punishable
behavior — this is actually the principle behind the modern-day
concept of positive behavior support, a technique that is
discussed in Chapter 8. Skinner (1948) described an experimental
society incorporating behavioral principles in his utopian novel,
Walden 2, so entitled as homage to the idyllic life depicted in
Thoreau’s much earlier work. Aspects of Skinner’s vision of a utopian
society, such as the extinguishment of competitiveness, and the
abolition of the nuclear family in favor of communal childrearing,
again provoked much debate.
Display Box 1–3. Skinner and Atheism
Skinner was a self-avowed atheist, which added to the

controversy that often surrounded his ideas. He believed that
no explanation for a phenomenon was better than a poor
explanation for a phenomenon, such as the belief that a deity
was the cause. He described the emergence of his atheism in
a brief autobiography, in which he described how his
grandmother told him of hell “by showing me the glowing
bed of coals in the parlor stove” (Boring & Linzey, 1967, p.
391). Later, a teacher, Miss Graves, who Skinner described as
a liberal but staunch Christian, suggested to him that some
people interpreted the Bible’s accounting of miracles as
figurative rather than literal. Skinner related the following:
“Within a year I had gone to Miss Graves to tell her that I no
longer believed in God. ‘I know,’ she said, ‘I have been
through that myself.’ But her strategy misfired: I never went
through it” (Boring & Linzey, 1967, p. 391).
The nature of early experimentation in establishing the principles

upon which behavior modification is based also contributed to the
public’s distrust of behavioral methods. Perhaps the description of
Watson’s “Little Albert” experiment foreshadowed the sometimes
extreme lengths to which early behavioral scientists went to
demonstrate the effectiveness of behavior modification techniques
(Watson & Rayner, 1920). Experimentation was conducted on a wide
range of human behaviors, among them communicative difficulties,
which later became known as speech and language disorders.
Behavioral techniques were also developed to assist in the
remediation of problem behaviors in children and adults with
intellectual disability and mental illness, populations with which the
SLP often comes into contact. A brief description of some of the
experiments in these areas is mentioned here; this type of
experimentation and relevant ethical issues are discussed in more
depth in Chapter 10.
Stuttering, which later came to be known as a fluency disorder,
was an observable, measurable behavior that lent itself nicely to
early experiments in behavioral modification. Flanagan, Goldiamond,
and Azrin (1958, 1959) conducted a series of two experiments to
demonstrate that stuttering was an act that could be manipulated by
bringing it under stimulus control. Participants in the first experiment
were three males, ages 15, 22, and 37, who stuttered. The stimulus
consisted of a high-pitched, loud tone (e.g., 6000 Hz, 105 dB). The
participants wore headphones, and the experimenter had access to a
switch that, when depressed, activated the noise stimulus. There
were two conditions in which the stimulus was presented: (a) the
aversive condition and (b) the escape condition. For the aversive
condition, the experimenter administered a 1-second blast of the
noise stimulus to the participant whenever the participant began to
stutter. Data collected indicated that under this condition, the
frequency of stuttering decreased. For the escape condition, the
noise was presented constantly through the participants’
headphones when the participants spoke fluently and ceased only
when participants began stuttering. Data collected indicated that
under the escape condition, stuttering increased.
In the aversive condition (Flanagan et al., 1958), the frequency

of stuttering decreased due to ______________ punishment.
In the escape condition (Flanagan et al., 1958), the frequency of

stuttering increased due to ______________ reinforcement.
The second experiment (Flanagan et al., 1959) was conducted in
much the same way, but participants were typically fluent speakers,
and the aversive stimulus used was electric shock. The participants
were given printed passages to read, while they were subjected to a
persistent, ongoing electric shock. Because no one is perfectly
fluent, every now and then a participant would stutter, and the
shock would cease. The participants then began to stutter frequently
to escape the electric shock. The researchers then reversed the
experiment, ceasing the electric shock when participants spoke
fluently and turning the shock back on when participants stuttered.
The participants then began to speak fluently, which was, of course,
no problem for them as they were normally fluent speakers. Results
of these two experiments demonstrated that frequency of stuttering
could be manipulated through application of the behavioral principles
of negative reinforcement and positive punishment.
Lovaas, Schaeffer, and Simmons (1965) also investigated the use
of electric shock as a negative reinforcer to increase social
interaction in children diagnosed with autism. Display Box 1–4
provides a description of behaviors commonly exhibited by people
with autism. Participants were 5-year-old identical twins with a
diagnosis of childhood schizophrenia, a past term applied to children
with autism, which is no longer used. Results indicated that it was
possible to compel the children to approach previously ignored
adults and to reduce their self-stimulatory behaviors to avoid the
painful, incessant shock the researchers administered. The
researchers also stated that, because the adults were associated
with cessation of the shock stimulus, the children also learned to
display affection toward them.
Lovaas went on to become the principal investigator of the
effectiveness of behavioral treatment for children with autism. His
most famous and influential work was a longitudinal study of the
application of an intense (e.g., 40 hours a week) behavior
modification program with an experimental group of 19 young
children with autism with a mean chronological age (CA) of 35
months at the beginning of the experiment (Lovaas, 1987). A control
group of 40 children, with a mean CA of 41 months at the beginning
of the experiment, was given a less intensive program of under 10
hours of behavior modification a week. The treatment administered
was centered on discrete trial therapy (see Chapter 5). The entire
program was described in detail in a teaching manual (Lovaas et al.,
1980) and included use of aversive procedures “as a last resort,”
including “the delivery of a loud ‘no’ or a slap on the thigh
contingent upon the presence of an undesirable behavior” (Lovaas,
1987, p. 5). Results were that, of the children in the experimental
group, nine children (47% of the total in the experimental group)
were enrolled in general education classrooms, and had successfully
completed first grade by the end of the experiment. All these
children also scored in the average or above-average range in
intelligence quotient (IQ) testing. These children were described as
having “recovered” from autism (p. 7). Eight children in the
experimental group were placed in special education classrooms,
with a mean IQ score of 70, indicating a mild degree of intellectual
disability. Only two of the children in the experimental group were
classified as “profoundly mentally retarded,” to use the terminology
of the day, and were placed in classrooms for severely disabled
children with autism, intellectual disability, or both (p. 6).
Display Box 1–4. Behaviors Characteristic

of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)
Children with ASD were participants in much of the early

research conducted to establish behavioral modification
techniques. Behaviors associated with autism range from
mild to severe and include the following:
Lack of eye contact

Stereotypical behaviors (e.g., hand flapping, spinning,
rocking, posturing, etc.)
Rigid adherence to routines
Hypo- or hyper-reaction to sensory stimuli
Ritualistic behaviors (e.g., lining up objects, picking leaves
off of bushes or lint off of rugs, etc.)
Severe impairments in social interaction and communication
Intense preoccupations with specific objects or activities
Echolalic speech
This list is not at all inclusive of every characteristic that

might be seen in people with ASD. Every person with autism
presents with a unique combination of symptoms; it is a very
heterogenous disorder.
For a full explanation of diagnostic criteria for ASD, see
the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,
Fifth Edition (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association,
2013).
The success of the children in Lovaas’s experimental group, who

received 40 hours of behavior modification treatment a week over 2
years, contrasted sharply with the progress made by the 40 children
in the control group, who received less than 10 hours of such
treatment over the same period of time. At the end of the
experiment, only 2% of those children had achieved “normal
educational and intellectual functioning”; 45% were classified as
“mildly retarded,” served in classrooms for children with language
delays; and 53% were “severely retarded,” served in classrooms for
children with profound intellectual disabilities (p. 3). Lovaas
extrapolated the results of his study to claim that, if parents got their
children to him as early as possible, preferably before 3½ years of
age, they had a 50% chance of seeing their child recover from
autism.
Lovaas’s study was groundbreaking and the first to suggest
something other than a totally bleak prognostic outlook for children
with autism. However, the study was not without its critics. Schopler,
Short, and Mesibov (1989) pointed out flaws in the methodology of
the study in the following areas: (a) lack of data documenting
specific outcomes, (b) biased participant selection, (c) the
intellectual level of the participants, and (d) the manner in which
participants were assigned to either the experimental or control
groups. Outcome measures consisted only of the subjective
judgment of school personnel that the recovered children were
indistinguishable from other children; the usual baseline and probe
data regarding specific social and communicative behaviors were not
reported. Participant selection was biased in favor of high-
functioning children with autism, as evidenced by Lovaas’s own
measurements of intellectual level and by the fact that children from
40 to 46 months were excluded from the study unless they exhibited
echolalic speech, a characteristic of children with autism that often
indicates a better prognostic profile. Finally, Schopler et al. (1989)
questioned the equivalency of the control group and experimental
group, pointing out that families of participant children who had
specific challenges such as divorce, personal problems, or the level
of severity of the child were offered the less intensive treatment;
thus, the children in the control groups came from families that were
highly dissimilar to the families of children in the experimental
group. Due to these methodological flaws, it was concluded that it
was “not possible to determine the effects of this intervention” (p.
164).
Lovaas, Smith, and McEachin (1989, p. 167) delivered a rebuttal
to these criticisms, stating that the use of control groups and
pretreatment and follow-up measures “safeguarded” their study
from the methodological flaws described by Schopler et al. (1989).
Furthermore, results of a 4-year follow-up study indicated that the
gains the children in the experimental high-intensity intervention
group made had been maintained over time (McEachin, Smith, &
Lovaas, 1993). In contrast, the children in the control low-intensity
intervention program continued to function at a much lower level
than children in the experimental group. These results sparked a
resurging interest in intensive behavioral treatment to address the
social and communicative deficits in children with autism. Regardless
of previous controversy over philosophical underpinnings of
behaviorism, it was recognized that techniques generated from the
science of behavior work. As one commentator stated, “To be
opposed to behavior modification is to be opposed to the law of
gravity” (Stolz, Wienckowski, & Brown, 1975, p. 1027).
Throughout the 1990s, modifications were made to traditional
rigid and sometimes aversive behavioral modification procedures. For
example, previous research had indicated that behavioral
modification was more effective if children with autism were taught
in natural environments with an emphasis on generalization of
taught behaviors. Techniques such as incidental teaching (Hart &
Risley, 1975), natural language paradigm (Koegel, O’Dell, & Koegel,
1987), and pivotal response training (Koegel & Frea, 1993) were
developed to embed behavioral principles in the child’s natural
environment. It was during this time that applied behavior analysis,
firmly rooted in the principles of behaviorism, also developed and is
presently considered to be an effective, evidence-based approach in
treating children with autism.
The science of applied behavior analysis (ABA) has received much

current recognition, particularly because it has generated a set of
methods that have been shown to be an efficacious way to improve
the behavior and communication skills of children with autism
spectrum disorder (ASD; Beavers, Iwata, & Lerman, 2013; Virues-
Ortega, 2010). Although most well-known for the treatment of ASD,
the methods have broad applicability to problem behaviors that may
be exhibited by any human being, including difficulties with
communication skills and undesirable behaviors that may get in the
way of getting help with those difficulties. Therefore, it is beneficial
for SLPs to have at least some knowledge of the well-researched
science of ABA.
Definition of ABA
ABA is a science resulting in a set of methods in which the principles

of behavior are applied in a systematic way to effectuate a change in
the behaviors of human beings. The purpose of ABA includes
identification of clearly defined problem behaviors, functional
assessment to discover environmental variables and contingencies
that may be contributing to the establishment and continuation of
problem behaviors, and intervention based on ongoing data
collection and multidisciplinary consultation.
ABA can be further conceptualized by individually considering its
three components. As the name implies, ABA is (a) applied, (b)
behavioral, and (c) analytic. Although these components were
originally described in the context of conducting scientific research
(Baer, Wolf, & Risley, 1968), they may also be applied to conducting
assessment and treatment of communicative disorders.
ABA is an applied science because it goes far beyond the mere
discovery of behavioral principles; instead, ABA results in a set of
methods that are then applied to effectuate behavior change in
individuals. ABA scientists are not concerned with changing just any
behavior. They seek to change specific behaviors that, when created
or improved, will affect an individual’s life in a socially significant,
positive way. They are also concerned with behaviors that, when
modified in a large number of individuals, will result in a better, more
peaceful, humane society. Furthermore, the behaviors ABA scientists
study are given operational definitions that make it possible to
directly observe and measure behaviors, preferably in natural
settings.
Giving an operational definition for a behavior makes it possible

for the behavior to be ______________ and ______________.
Similarly, SLPs seek to apply treatment to effectuate

improvement in communicative behaviors that will result in the most
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Danton is thrown back upon insurrection. He, who desired men to
forget the days of October, was compelled to the 10th of August
because he was aroused. Even the massacres were attached to his
name, and there still trails after him an easy flow of accusation, only
a little less sordid or less terrible.
To follow his action during the first months of 1772, to hear his
speeches on the war, and to note his policy, we must leave him at
his post in the Commune (where we shall find him again when Paris
rises in the summer), and see how he stands for the Mountain at the
Jacobins.
This club was now definitely the organ of the left. It was after
Danton had been elected, but before he was definitely installed in
office,[108] on the 14th of December, a week after the former and five
weeks before the latter event, that the debate on the war was begun
at the Jacobins,—a debate of the first importance, because it opened
the breach between the Girondins and the Mountain, between the
orators who insisted on going to meet Europe, and even on a war of
propaganda, and the reformers who wished Europe to take the first
step, who dreaded war or who thought a war of aggression immoral.
At the head of these last was Robespierre. But it is not too much to
say that in the first months of the year Danton was more important at
the Jacobins than Robespierre. What was his attitude? It was part of
the general policy upon which he had determined: he compromised.
In his first motion on the 14th of December, he attacked the idea of
declaring war. On the 16th he still attacked it, but in other terms. “I
know it must come. If any one were to ask me, ‘Are we to have war?’
I would reply (not in argument, but as a matter of fact), ‘We shall
hear the bugles,’” But the whole speech is taken up with an
argument upon its dangers, and especially upon “those who desire
war in the hope of reaction, who talk of giving us a constitution like
that of England, in the hope of giving us, later, one like that of
Turkey.”
In March and April, the months when the war was preparing and
was declared, he was silent. And we can understand his silence
when we turn to his speech in the Commune when he was given
office. He alludes to the false character given him; he speaks of the
reputation which his past actions in Paris had given; he says things
that indicate a determination to play the part of a Moderate, and to
see whether in his case, as in that of so many others, there would
not be permanence in the compromise of the last six months. But
there rankled in his mind the insults of the men with whom he sat,
Condorcet’s disavowal in his paper of so much as knowing Danton,
and he made a peroration which at the time offended, but which
possesses for us a certain pathos. “Nature gave me a strong frame,
and she put into my face the violence of liberty. I have not sprung
from a family which was weakened by the protection of the old
privileges; my existence has been all my own; I know that I have
kept and shown my vigour, but in my profession and in my private life
I have controlled it. If I was carried away by enthusiasm in the first
days of our regeneration, have I not atoned for it? Have I not been
ostracised?... I have given myself altogether to the people, and now
that they are beyond attack, now that they are in arms and ready to
break the league unless it consents to dissolve,[109] I will die in their
cause if I must, ... for I love them only, and they deserve it. Their
courage will make them eternal.”
This outburst is the one occasion of his public life in which Danton
spoke of himself, and it has the ring of genuine emotion; for in all his
harangues he preserved, both before and after this, an objective
attitude, if anything too much bent upon the outward circumstances.
Thus, when the notes came to go between the Austrian and the
French governments, he was silent. He fears that France is
unprepared; he fears that the King is betraying the nation. How much
he was a traitor was not known till a far later period; but when at
least it is proved that something is undermining the French people,
that, apart from the defeats and the lack of preparation, there is
treason, then he leaves his silence. The policy of the Moderate
acting in a settled state is no longer possible to any one; the court
and the nation stood one against the other, and one side or the other
must be taken by every man. Then he put off the conventions which
he respected, and which he regretted to the end; he went back into
the street; he headed the insurrection, destroyed the monarchy; for
twelve months he took upon himself all the responsibility of errors in
his own policy, and of crime in that of his associates. He saved
France, but at this expense, that he went out of the world with a
reputation which he knew to be false, that he saw his great powers
vulgarised, and that he could never possess, either in his own mind
or before the world, not even in France, his true name. The whole of
this tragedy is to be found in his trial, and here and there in the few
phrases that escape him in the speeches or with his friends. If you
sum it up, it comes to this paraphrase of a great sentence: Son nom
était flétri mais la France était libre.
It was upon April the 18th that the new Girondin ministry received
the note from Vienna rejecting the French proposals of a month
before. The poor King, who had been protesting his loyalty to the
nation in Paris, had been protesting in Vienna the necessity of
sending an army to save him, and Austria gave this reply. On April
20th the Assembly declared war with practical unanimity[110] upon
“the King of Hungary and of Bohemia.” But the phrase was useless.
You might as well put a match into gunpowder and say, “It is the
sulphur I am after, not the charcoal.” Prussia joined, and within a
year we shall see all Europe at war with France, in a war that
outlawed and destroyed.
Danton was right. France was hopelessly unready. She had not
learnt the necessary truth that the soldier is a man with a trade. The
orators had mistaken words for things; honest and great as they
were, they had fallen in this matter into the faults common to small
and dishonest verbiage. The rout and panic under De Dillon, his
murder by the troops, the occupation of Quiévrain, came one upon
the other. Paris was full of terror and anger in proportion to the
greatness of the things she had done, which now seemed all
destroyed. “We said and did things that should have convinced the
world; we were to be a people unconquerable from our love of
liberty, and we appear a beaten, panic-stricken lot—volunteers and
babblers who cannot stand fire.” The King dismissed the Girondin
ministers, even sent Dumouriez away, heard Roland’s remonstrance,
knew that the Assembly was more and more against him; but he
remained calm. There was a plan of the simplest. There was to be
nothing but a few days of monotonous marching between the allies
and Paris. Lafayette with his army of the centre was on his side. The
Assembly decreed a great camp of 20,000 men under Paris, and the
disbanding of the guard; the guard was disbanded, but the King
vetoed the decree. Lafayette wrote his letter menacing the
Parliament with his army; the reaction seemed in full success and
the invaders secure, when Danton reappeared.
On the 18th of June he found the old phrases against Lafayette at
the Jacobins. “It is a great day for France; Lafayette with only one
face on is no longer dangerous.” He did not make, but he permitted
the 20th of June; and as Paris rose, and the immense mob,
grotesque, many-coloured, armed with all manner of sharp things,
passed before the Assembly and into the Tuilleries, it might have
been a signal or a warning. The excited citizen makes a poor soldier,
but if Paris moves the whole great body of France stirs. Such giants
take long to be fully awake, and it is a matter of months to drill men;
still it is better to let great enemies sleep. There was in that foolish,
amiable crowd, with its pleasure at the sight of the King, its comic
idea of warning him, something serious underlying. Danton will be
using it in a very short time; for there are points of attack where
mobs are like machine-guns—ridiculous in general warfare, but very
useful indeed in special conditions, and in these conditions
invincible. This something serious was that vague force (you may
call it only an idea) which you will never find in an individual, and
which you will always discover in a mass—the great common man
which the French metaphysicians have called “Le Peuple;” that,
drilled, is called by the least metaphysical an army.
A week later Lafayette appeared. He demanded the right to use
the army, and July opened with the certainty of civil war.
July is the month of fevers; the heat has been moving northward,
and all France is caught in it. The grapes fill out, and even in Picardy
or in the Cotentin you feel as though the Midi were giving her spirit to
the north. July made the Revolution and closed it. A month that saw
the Bastille fall and that buried Robespierre is a very national time.
If you overlook France at this moment, you may see the towns
stirring as they had stirred three years before; it is from them that the
opposition rises—especially from Marseilles. A crowd of young men
dragging cannon, the common-place sons of bourgeois, whom the
time had turned into something as great as peasants or as soldiers,
surged up the white deserts along the Rhone, passing the great
sheet of vineyards that slopes up the watershed of Burgundy. As
they came along they sang an excellent new marching song. When
they at last saw Paris, especially the towers of Notre Dame from
where they just show above the city as you come in from
Fontainebleau, and as the roads came in together and the suburbs
thickened they sang it with louder voices. On the evening of the 30th
they came to the gates, and the workmen of the south-eastern
quarter began to sing it and called it the “Marseillaise.” No one can
describe music; but if in a great space of time the actions of the
French become meaningless and the Revolution ceases to be an
origin, some one perhaps will recover this air, as we have recovered
a few stray notes of Greek music, and it will carry men back to the
Republic.
For ten days the insurrection grew. In a secret committee which
the Sections formed, men violent like Fournier, or good soldiers like
Westermann, or local leaders of quarters like Santerre—but all
outside the official body—organised the fighting force, and at their
head the one man who held the strings of the municipality—Danton.
The Assembly had heard Vergniaud’s angry speech, but it had also
confirmed the constitution and the monarchy in the “baiser
Lamourette.” Paris had to work alone, and the King, seeing only
Paris before him, filled the Tuilleries, and stood by with a small
garrison to repress the mere movement of the city—“something that
should have been done in ’89.”
It was on a Paris thus enfevered, doubtful, nursing a secret
insurrectionary plan, but full of men who hesitated and doubted,
having still many who were loyal, that there fell[111] the document
which the King had asked of his friends—but which he must, on
seeing it, have regretted—the manifesto of the commander of the
allies. This extraordinary monument of folly is rarely presented in its
entirety. It is only in such a form that its full monstrosity can be
appreciated, and I have therefore been at pains to translate for my
readers the rather halting French in which Charles William proposed
to arrest the movements of Providence. It ran as follows[112]:—
“Their Majesties the Emperor and the King of Prussia having given
me the command of the armies assembled on the French frontier, I
have thought it well to tell the inhabitants of that kingdom the motives
that have inspired the measures taken by the two sovereigns and the
intentions that guide them.
“After having arbitrarily suppressed the rights and the possessions
of the German princes in Alsace and Lorraine, troubled and overset
public order and their legitimate government, exercised against the
sacred person of the King and against his august family violence
which is (moreover) repeated and renewed from day to day, those
who have usurped the reins of the administration have at last filled
up the measure by causing an unjust war to be declared against his
Majesty the Emperor, and by attacking his provinces in the
Netherlands.
“Several possessions of the German Empire have been drawn into
this oppression, and several others have only escaped from a similar
danger by yielding to the imperious threats of the dominant party and
its emissaries.
“His Prussian Majesty with his Imperial Majesty, by the ties of a
strict and defensive alliance, and himself a preponderant member of
the Germanic body (sic), has therefore been unable to excuse
himself from going to the aid of his ally and of his fellow State (sic).
And it is under both these heads that he undertakes the defence of
that monarch and of Germany.
“To these great interests another object of equal importance must
be added, and one that is near to the heart of the two sovereigns: it
is that of ending the domestic anarchy of France, of arresting the
attacks which are directed against the altar and the throne, of re-
establishing the legitimate power, of giving back to the King the
freedom and safety of which he is deprived, and of giving him the
means to exercise the lawful authority which is his due.
“Convinced as they are that the healthy part of the French people
abhors the excesses of a party that enslaves them, and that the
majority of the inhabitants are impatiently awaiting the advent of a
relief that will permit them to declare themselves openly against the
odious schemes of their oppressors, His Majesty the Emperor and
His Majesty the King of Prussia call upon them to return at once to
the call of reason and justice, of order, of peace. It is in view of these
things that I, the undersigned, General Commander-in-Chief of the
two armies, declare—
“(1) That led into the present war by irresistible

circumstances, the two allied courts propose no object to
themselves but the happiness of France, and do not propose
to enrich themselves by annexation.
“(2) That they have no intention of meddling with the
domestic government of France, but only wish to deliver the
King, and the Queen, and the Royal Family from their
captivity, and procure for his Most Christian Majesty that
freedom which is necessary for him to call such a council as
he shall see fit, without danger and without obstacle, and to
enable him to work for the good of his subjects according to
his promises and as much as may be his concern.
“(3) That the combined armies will protect all towns,
boroughs, and villages, and the persons and goods of all
those that will submit to the King, and that they will help to re-
establish immediately the order and police of France.
“(4) That the National Guard are ordered to see to the
peace of the towns and country-sides provisionally, and to the
security of the persons and goods of all Frenchmen
provisionally, that is, until the arrival of the troops of their
Royal and Imperial Majesties, or until further orders, under
pain of being personally responsible; that on the contrary, the
National Guards who may have fought against the troops of
the allied courts, and who are captured in arms, shall be
treated as enemies, and shall be punished as rebels and
disturbers of the public peace.
“(5) That the generals, officers, non-commissioned officers,
and privates of the French troops of the line are equally
ordered to return to their old allegiance and to submit at once
to the King, their legitimate sovereign.
“(6) That the members of departmental, district, and town
councils are equally responsible with their heads and property
for all crimes, arson, murders, thefts, and assaults, the
occurrence of which they allow or do not openly, and to the
common knowledge, try to prevent in their jurisdiction; that
they shall equally be bound to keep their functions
provisionally until his Most Christian Majesty, reinstated in full
liberty, has further decreed; or until, in the interval, other
orders shall have been given.
“(7) That the inhabitants of towns, boroughs, and villages
who may dare to defend themselves against the troops of
their Imperial and Royal Majesties by firing upon them,
whether in the open or from the windows, doors, or apertures
of their houses, shall be punished at once with all the rigour of
the laws of war, their houses pulled down or burnt. All those
inhabitants, on the contrary, of the towns, boroughs, and
villages who shall hasten to submit to their King by opening
their gates to the troops of their Majesties shall be placed
under the immediate protection of their Majesties; their
persons, their goods, their chattels shall be under the
safeguard of the laws, and measures will be taken for the
general safety of each and all of them.
“(8) The town of Paris and all its inhabitants without
distinction shall be bound to submit on the spot, and without
any delay, to the King, and to give that Prince full and entire
liberty, and to assure him and all the Royal Family that
inviolability and respect to which the laws of nature and of
nations entitle sovereigns from their subjects. Their Imperial
and Royal Majesties render personally responsible for
anything that may happen, under peril of their heads, and of
military execution without hope of pardon, all members of the
National Assembly as of the Districts, the Municipality, the
National Guards, the Justices of the Peace, and all others
whom it may concern. Their aforesaid Majesties declare,
moreover, on their word and honour as Emperor and King,
that if the Palace of the Tuilleries be insulted or forced, that if
the least violence, the least assault, be perpetrated against
their Majesties, the King, the Queen, and the Royal Family,
and if steps be not at once taken for their safety, preservation,
and liberty, they, their Imperial and Royal Majesties, will take
an exemplary and never-to-be-forgotten vengeance, by giving
up the town of Paris to military execution and to total
subversion, and the guilty rebels to the deaths they have
deserved. Their Imperial and Royal Majesties promise, on the
contrary, to the inhabitants of Paris to use their good offices
with his Most Christian Majesty to obtain pardon for their
faults and errors, and to take the most vigorous measures to
ensure their persons and goods if they promptly and exactly
obey the above command.
“Finally, since their Majesties can recognise no laws in
France save those that proceed from the King in full liberty,
they protest in advance against any declarations that may be
made in the name of his Most Christian Majesty, so long as
his sacred person, those of the Queen and of the Royal
Family, are not really safe, for which end their Imperial and
Royal Majesties invite and beg his Most Christian Majesty to
point out to what town in the immediate neighbourhood of his
frontiers he may judge it best to retire with the Queen and the
Royal Family, under good and sure escort that will be sent
him for that purpose, in order that his Most Christian Majesty
may be in all safety to call to him such deputies and
counsellors as he sees fit, call such councils as may please
him, see to the re-establishment of order, and arrange the
administration of his kingdom.
“Lastly, I engage myself, in my own private name and in my
aforesaid capacity, to cause the troops under my command to
observe everywhere a good and exact discipline, promising to
treat with mildness and moderation all well-meaning subjects
who may show themselves peaceful and submissive, and to
use force with those only who may be guilty of resistance and
of recalcitrance.
“It is for these reasons that I require and exhort, in the
strongest and most instant fashion, all the inhabitants of this
kingdom not to oppose themselves to the march and
operations of the troops under my command, but rather to
give them on all sides a free entry and all the good-will, aid,
and assistance that circumstances may demand.
“Given at our headquarters of Coblentz, July 28.
(Signed) “Charles William Ferdinand,
Duke of Brunswick-Lunebourg.”
With that weapon the insurrection was certain of all Paris. Mandat,
who had replaced Lafayette at the head of the armed force in the
town, was still loyal to the King; he organised, as far as was
possible, the forces that he could count upon. The other side also
prepared, and the movements had all the appearance of troops
entrenching themselves before battle.
Danton went to Arcis and settled an income on his mother in case
of his death, came back to Paris, and on the night of August the 9th
the Sections named commissioners to act. They met and formed the
“insurrectionary commune.” At eight the next morning they dissolved
the legal commune, kept Danton, and directed the fighting of the
morning.
Meanwhile the King had gathered in the Tuilleries about 6000
men, and depended very largely upon the thick mass of wooden
buildings in the Carrousel for cover. The Swiss Guard, whom the
decree had removed, were only as far off as Rueil, and were ordered
into Paris, over 1500. They were the nucleus, and with them some
2000 of the National Guard, 1500 of the old “Constitutional Guards,”
and a group of “Gentilshommes.” Mandat had ordered a battery of
the National Guard’s artillery to keep the Pont Neuf; they revolted
and joined the people, and Mandat himself, the chief of the defence,
was killed on the steps of the Hotel de Ville. Danton, who had not
slept, but had lain down in Desmoulin’s flat till midnight, had been to
the Hotel de Ville since two in the morning, and he took before
posterity—in his trial—the responsibility of Mandat’s death. He did
more. He acted during the short night (a night of calm and great
beauty, dark and with stars) as the organiser and chief of the
insurrection. Especially he appoints Santerre to lead the National
Guard. On these rapid determinations the morning broke, and the
first hours of the misty day passed in gathering the forces.
Meanwhile all morning the King had waited anxiously in the
Tuilleries gardens, and asked Roederer, like a king in comic opera,
“when the revolt would begin.”
All night the tocsin had sounded, but the people were slow to
gather—“le tocsin ne rend pas”—and it was not till the
insurrectionary commune had done its work that a great mob, partly
armed, and in no way disciplined, came into the Carrousel.
Westermann (riding, as was Santerre) came up to parley with the
Swiss Guard; he asked them in German (which was his native
tongue, for he was an Alsatian) to leave the Tuilleries, and promised
that if the guard retired and left the palace un-garrisoned the people
would also retire. The Swiss—the only real soldiers in Paris—replied
that they were under orders, and when Westermann retired to the
crowd they opened fire.
Antoinette had said, “Nail me to the Palace,” and even Louis, timid
and uncertain, thought that the chances were in his favour. Let only
this day succeed, and the city could be kept quiet till the allies should
arrive; that had been the boast in the Royalist journal of August 1st; it
was Louis’s hope now.
Had the Carrousel been a little more open, the battle might have
ended in favour of the garrison, but the numerous buildings, on the
whole, helped the attack, and the Swiss, unable to deploy, fought,
almost singly, a very unequal fight. There were no volleys except the
first. Rapid individual firing from the doors and windows of the
palace, the crowd pressing up through the narrowest space (but at a
loss of hundreds of lives), and finally, by the end which gave on the
“Grande Galerie” the Tuilleries were forced, the garrison killed, and
only a small detachment of the Swiss Guard retreated through the
gardens, firing alternate volleys, and saving themselves by an
admirable discipline.
But while the issue was still doubtful, Louis and his family had
gone slowly through the same gardens to the Riding-school, and had
taken refuge with the Assembly. The noise of the fusillade came
sharply in at the windows, and the event was still uncertain when the
Parliament received the King and promised him protection. The
president opened for him a small door at the right of the chair, and
the King and Queen and their children watched the meaningless
resolutions through a grating as they sat in the little dark box that
gave them refuge. The debate, I say, lacked meaning, but the battle
grew full of meaning as they heard it. The shots were less frequent,
the noise of the mob—the roar—was suddenly muffled in the walls of
the palace. The crowd had entered it. Then came the few sharp
volleys of the retreating guard right under the windows of the
Manège, and finally the firing ceased, and the Assembly knew that
their oath was of no value, and that the Tuilleries had fallen. Louis
also knew it, eating his grotesque roast chicken in the silent and
hidden place that was the first of his prisons. He saw in the bright
light of the hall many of the faces that were to be the rulers of
France, but for himself, in his silence, he felt all power to be gone.
He had become a Capet—there was truth in the Republican formula.
There had been played—though few have said it, it should be said—
a very fine game. The stakes were high and the Court party dared
them. They played to win all that the Kings had possessed, and for
this great stake they risked a few foolish titles without power. The
game was even; it was worth playing, and they had lost. But the man
who had been their puppet and their figure-head hardly knew what
had happened. Perhaps the Queen alone comprehended, and from
that moment found the proud silence and the glance that has
dignified her end. In her the legend of the lilies had found its last ally,
but now the great shield was broken for ever.
So perished the French monarchy. Its dim origins stretched out
and lost themselves in Rome; it had already learnt to speak and
recognised its own nature when the vaults of the Thermae echoed
heavily to the slow footsteps of the Merovingian kings. Look up that
vast valley of dead men crowned, and you may see the gigantic
figure of Charlemagne, his brows level and his long white beard
tangled like an undergrowth, having in his left hand the globe and in
his right the hilt of an unconquerable sword. There also are the short,
strong horsemen of the Robertian house, half-hidden by their leather
shields, and their sons before them growing in vestment and
majesty, and taking on the pomp of the Middle Ages; Louis VII., all
covered with iron; Philip the Conqueror; Louis IX., who alone is
surrounded with light: they stand in a widening interminable
procession, this great crowd of kings; they loose their armour, they
take their ermine on, they are accompanied by their captains and
their marshals; at last, in their attitude and in their magnificence they
sum up in themselves the pride and the achievement of the French
nation. But time has dissipated what it could not tarnish, and the
process of a thousand years has turned these mighty figures into
unsubstantial things. You may see them in the grey end of darkness,
like a pageant all standing still. You look again, but with the growing
light and with the wind that rises before morning they have
disappeared.
CHAPTER V
THE REPUBLIC
August 10, 1792—April 5, 1793
The 10th of August is not, in the history of the Revolution, a

turning-point or a new departure merely; it is rather a cataclysm, the
conditions before and after which are absolutely different. You may
compare it to the rush of the Atlantic, which “in one dreadful day and
night” swept away the old civilisation in the legend. It is like one of
the geological “faults” which form the great inland escarpments, and
to read or to write of it is like standing on the edge of Auvergne. You
have just passed through a volcanic plateau, rising slowly, more and
more desolate: you find yourself looking down thousands of feet on
to the great plain of Limagne.
There is no better test of what the monarchy was than the
comparison of that which came before with that which succeeded its
overthrow. There is no continuity. On the far side of the insurrection,
up to the 9th of August itself, you have armies (notably that of the
centre) contented with monarchy; you have a strong garrison at the
Tuilleries, the ministers, the departments, the mayor of Paris (even)
consulting with the crown. The King and the Girondins are opposed,
but they are balanced; Paris is angry and expectant, but it has
expressed nothing—it is one of many powers. The moderate men,
the Rolands and the rest, are the radical wing. It is a triumph for the
Revolution that the Girondins should be again in nominal control.
Pétion is an idol. The acute friction is between a government of
idealists standing at the head of a group of professional bourgeois,
and a crown supported by a resurrected nobility, expecting succour
and strong enough to hazard a pitched battle.
Look around you on the 11th of August and see what has
happened. Between the two opponents a third has been intervened
—Paris and its insurrectionary Commune have suddenly arisen. The
Girondins are almost a reactionary party. The Crown and all its
scaffolding have suddenly disappeared. The Assembly seems
something small, the ministry has fallen back, and there appears
above it one man only—Danton, called Minister of Justice, but
practically the executive itself. A crowd of names which had stood for
discussion, for the Jacobins, for persistent ineffective opposition,
appear as masters. In a word, France had for the moment a new and
terrible pretender to the vacant throne, a pretender that usurped it at
last—the Commune.
The nine months with which this chapter will deal formed the
Republic; it is they that are the introduction to the Terror and to the
great wars, and from the imprisonment of the King to the fall of the
Girondins the rapid course of France is set in a narrowing channel
directly for the Mountain. The Commune, the body that conquered in
August, is destined to capture every position, and, as one guarantee
after another breaks down, it will attain, with its extreme doctrines
and their concomitant persecution, to absolute power.
What was Danton’s attitude during this period? It may be summed
up as follows: Now that the Revolution was finally established, to
keep France safe in the inevitable danger. He put the nation first; he
did not subordinate the theory of the Revolution; he dismissed it. The
Revolution had conquered: it was there; but France, which had made
it and which proposed to extend the principles of self-government to
the whole world, was herself in the greatest peril. When discussion
had been the method of the Revolution, Danton had been an
extremist. He was Parisian and Frondeur in 1790 and 1791; it was
precisely in that time that he failed. The tangible thing, the objective
to which all his mind leaned, appeared with the national danger; then
he had something to do, and his way of doing it, his work in the trade
to which he was born, showed him to be of a totally different kind
from the men above whom he showed. I do not believe one could
point to a single act of his in these three-quarters of a year which
was not aimed at the national defence.
It is a point of special moment in the appreciation of his politics
that Danton was alone in this position. He was the only man who
acted as one of the innumerable peasantry of France would have
acted, could fate have endowed such a peasant with genius and with
knowledge. The others to the left and right were soldiers, poets, or
pedants every one. Heroic pedants and poets who were never
afraid, but not one of them could forget his theories or his vision and
take hold of the ropes. Such diplomacy as there is is Danton’s; it is
Danton who attempts compromise, and it is Danton who persistently
recalls the debates from personalities to work. It is he who warns the
Girondins, and it is he who, in the anarchy that followed defeat,
produced the necessary dictatorship of the Committee. Finally, when
the Committee is formed, you glance at the names, the actions, and
the reports, and you see Danton moving as a man who can see
moves among the blind. He had been once “in himself the
Cordeliers”—it had no great effect, for there was nothing to do but
propose rights; now, after the insurrection, he became “in himself the
executive,” and later “in himself the Committee.” So much is he the
first man in France during these few months of his activity, that only
by following his actions can you find the unity of this confused and
anarchic period.
It falls into four very distinct divisions, both from the point of view
of general history and from that of Danton’s own life. The first
includes the six weeks intervening between the 10th of August and
the meeting of the Convention; it is a time almost without authority; it
moves round the terrible centre of the massacres. During this brief
time the executive, barely existent, without courts or arms, had him
in the Ministry of Justice as their one power—a power unfortunately
checked by the anarchy in Paris.
The second division stretches from the meeting of the Convention
to the death of the King. It covers exactly four months, from the 20th
of September 1792 to the 21st of January 1793. It is the time in
which the danger of invasion seems lifted, and in which Danton in
the Convention is working publicly to reconcile the two parties, and
secretly to prevent, if possible, the spread of the coalition against
France.
The third opens with the universal war that follows the death of
Louis, and continues to a date which you may fix at the rising of the
10th of March, or at the defeat of Neerwinden on the 19th. Danton is
absent with the army during the greater part of these six weeks; he
returns at their close, and when things were at their worst, to create
the two great instruments which he destined to govern France—the
Tribunal and the Committee.
Finally, for two months, from the establishment of these to the
expulsion of the Girondins on the 2nd of June, he is being gradually
driven from the attempt at conciliation to the necessities of the
insurrection. He is organising and directing the new Government of
the Public Safety, and in launching that new body, in imposing that
necessary dictator, we shall see him sacrificing one by one every
minor point in his policy, till at last his most persistent attempt—I
mean his attempt to save the Girondins—fails in its turn. Having so
secured an irresistible government, and having created the armies,
the chief moment of his life was past. It remained to him to retire, to
criticise the excesses of his own creation, and to be killed by it.
Immediately after the insurrection, a week after he had taken the

oath and made the short vigorous speech to the Assembly,[113]
Danton sent out his first and almost his only act as Minister of
Justice, the circular of the 18th of August,[114] which was posted to
all the tribunals in France. It is peculiar rather than important; it is the
attempt to convince the magistracy and all the courts of the justice
and necessity of the insurrection, and at the same time to leave upon
record a declaration of his own intentions now that he had reached
power. In the first attempt he necessarily fails. The old judicature,
appointed by the Crown and by the moderate ministers, largely re-
elected by the people, wealthy for the most part, conservative by
origin and tradition, would in any case have rejected such
leadership; but the matter is unimportant; this passive body, upon
which the reaction had counted not a little, and which De Cicé had
planned to use against the Revolution, was destined to disappear at
the first demand of the new popular powers. France for weeks was
practically without courts of law.
Those passages, on the other hand, in which Danton makes his
own apology are full of interest. They contain in a few sentences the
outline of all his domestic policy, and we find in them Danton’s
memories, his fears of what his past reputation might do to hurt him.
“I came in through the breach of the Tuilleries, and you can only
find in me the same man who was president of the Cordeliers.... The
only object of my thoughts has been political and individual liberty, ...
the maintenance of the laws, ... the strict union of all the
Departments, ... the splendour of the State, and the equality, not of
fortune, for that is impossible, but of rights and of well-being.”
If we except the puerilities of the new great seal, the Hercules with
eighty-four stars (to represent the union of the Departments),
replaced by the conventional Liberty and fasces, there is practically
nothing more from Danton as Minister of Justice. But as the one
active man in the Cabinet he is the pivot of the whole time. Those
qualities in him which had so disgusted the men of letters were the
exterior of a spirit imperatively demanded in Paris at the time. His
heavy, rapid walk, the coarseness and harshness of his voice, his
brutality in command, exercised a physical pressure upon the old
man Roland, the mathematician Monge, and the virtuous journalists
who accompanied them. I know of but one character in that set
which could have prevented Danton’s ascendancy, and have met his
ugly strength by a force as determined and more refined. Roland’s
wife might have done it, but though she was the soul of the ministry,
she was hardly a minister, and being a woman, she was confined to
secondary and indirect methods. Her hatred of Danton increased to
bitterness as she saw him succeed, but she could not intervene, and
France was saved from the beauty and the ideals which might have
been the syrens of her shipwreck.
The three weeks following the 10th of August were filled with the
news of the invasion. The King of Prussia had hesitated to march.
France, full of herself, never understood that such a thing was
possible. The kings were on the march, the great and simple ideas,
so long in opposition, had met in battle. All France thought that 1792
was already 1793. Perhaps there were only two men in the country
who saw the immaturity, the complexity, and the chances of the
situation—I mean Danton and Dumouriez: Dumouriez, because he
was by nature a schemer who had seen and was to see the matter
from close at hand; Danton, because, from the first moment of his
entrance into the ministry, he had gathered up the threads of
negotiation into his hand.
The King of Prussia had hesitated, so had Brunswick. It was the
success of the insurrection that decided them. They made the error
that the foreigner always makes, the error that led the most
enlightened Frenchmen to exaggerate the liberal forces in England,
the error of seeing ourselves in others. They imagined that “the sane
body of the nation,” the Frenchmen that thought like Prussians,
would rise in defence of the monarchy and in aid of the invasion.
They had no conception of how small in number, how hesitating, and
how vile were the anti-national party.
On Sunday the 19th the frontier was crossed; on the Thursday
Longwy capitulated, and a German garrison held the rocky plateau
that overlooks the plain of Luxembourg. A week later, Thursday the
30th, Verdun was surrounded.
From the hills above the town, the same hills which make of
Verdun the fifth great entrenched camp of modern France, the
Prussian batteries bombarded with a plunging fire. There may have
been food and ammunition for two or three more days, but fire had
broken out in several quarters, and the town council was imploring
Beaurepaire to surrender. Brunswick proposed a truce and terms of
capitulation. On the Saturday, the 1st of September, after a violent
discussion, the terms were rejected, but Beaurepaire knew that
nothing could save the town, and in the night he shot himself. On the
next day, Sunday the second, Verdun yielded and the road to Paris
lay open.
Meanwhile, in the capital itself, a vortex was opening, and the poor
remnants of public authority and of public order were being drawn
down into it. The 10th of August had been a victory into which there
entered three very dangerous elements. First, it was not final; it had
been won against a small local garrison under the menace of an
invasion, and this invasion was proving itself irresistible. Secondly, it
had left behind it terrors accentuated by success; I mean whatever
fears of vengeance or of the destruction of Paris existed before the
insurrection were doubled when so much greater cause had been
given for the “execution” that Brunswick had threatened. Finally, the
success of the insurrection had of itself destroyed the last shadow of
executive power, for all such power, weak and perishing though it
was, had centred in the King.
But besides these clear conditions which the 10th of August had
produced, there was something deeper and more dangerous—the
fear which fed upon itself and became panic, and which ran
supported by anger growing into madness. There was no news but
made it worse, no sight in the streets and no rumour but increased
the intolerable pressure. Trade almost ceased, and the whole course
of exchange, which is the blood of a great city, seemed to have run
to the heart. Over the front of the Hotel de Ville hung that enormous
black flag with the letters “Danger” staring from it in white, and in the
heavy winds another blew out straight and rattled from the towers of
Notre Dame. Every action savoured of nightmare, and suffered from
a spirit grotesque, exaggerated, and horrible. The very day after the
fight a great net had been cast over Paris and drawn in full of
royalists. The gates had been shut suddenly, and every suspect
arrested by order of the Commune. The prisons were full of
members of the great conspiracy, for in civil war the vanquished
appear as traitors. Then there arose a violent demand for the trial
and punishment of those who had called in the foreigner, and a
demand as violent, touching on miracle, for innumerable volunteers.
In every project there ran this spirit of madness mixed with
inspiration.
If Paris lost its head, so did the Assembly and the Moderates, but
in another fashion. Paris was pale with the intensity of anger, Roland
from a sudden paralysis. The fear of Paris was an angry panic; with
the Girondins it was the sudden sickness that takes some men at the
sight of blood. Paris had clamoured for an excess when it demanded
the trial of the Swiss, who had done nothing beyond their mercenary
duty; but the executive met it by an excess of weakness when it
produced its court of ridiculous and just pedants, afraid to condemn,

Behavioral Principles in Communicative Disorders Applications To Assessment and Treatment 1st Edition Christine A. Maul

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Behavioral Principles in Communicative Disorders Applications To Assessment and Treatment 1st Edition Christine A. Maul

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Behavioral Principles in

Communicative Disorders Applications

Opioid Use Disorders A Holistic Guide to Assessment

Language Disorders a functional approach to assessment

Awakening Hope A Developmental Behavioral Biological

Adult Deliberate Firesetting : Theory, Assessment, and

Neuromuscular Disorders: Treatment and Management Tulio

Cortical Visual Impairment An Approach to Assessment

Treatment of Disorders in Childhood and Adolescence

Suicide Assessment and Treatment Planning A Strengths

Christine A. Maul, PhD, CCC-SLP

Copyright © by Plural Publishing, Inc. 2016

Typeset in 10.5/13 Palatino by Flanagan’s Publishing Services, Inc.

All rights, including that of translation, reserved. No part of this

For permission to use material from this text, contact us by

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Chapter 1. Introduction to Behaviorism

Chapter 2. Verbal Behavior

Chapter 3. Defining and Measuring Behaviors

Chapter 4. Functional Behavior Assessment and Applications

Chapter 5. Discrete Trial Teaching (DTT): A Framework

Chapter 6. Teaching New Behaviors

Chapter 7. Generalizing and Maintaining Behaviors

Chapter 8. Decreasing Undesirable Behaviors

Chapter 9. Establishing the Evidence Base: Single-Case

Chapter 10. Ethics in Scientific Research and Clinical

Welcome to Behavioral Principles in Communicative Disorders:

— Amanda Nicolson Adams,

Amanda Nicolson Adams, PhD, BCBA

Brooke R. Findley, MA, CCC-SLP, BCBA

Christine A. Maul, PhD, CCC-SLP

Frances Pomaville, PhD, CCC-SLP

Why Should SLPs Learn the Principles of Behaviorism and

Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) are in the business of changing

SLPs are ethically charged to engage in _______-_______

Clients served by SLPs often present with accompanying

Clients with behavioral difficulties will benefit from collaboration

Definition and History of Behaviorism

Behaviorism as a philosophy is grounded in the principles of

The belief that knowledge can be derived only from sensory

Determinism is the belief that nothing that happens in the world

The belief that every effect has a cause is called

The philosophical concepts of empiricism and determinism

Early Behavioral Scientists

Behavioral principles have been in operation since the beginning of

To understand Pavlov’s pioneering work, it is necessary to distinguish

Watson was the mentalist’s biggest foe. He soundly denounced the

Figure 1–1. The process of respondent conditioning.

Display Box 1–1. Keep Those White Coats in the Closet!

Although respondent conditioning has little application to the

Watson wrote in the area of childrearing, advocating for a

For more information on Watson’s writings on childrearing,

In the Little Albert experiment, what were the unconditioned

Behaviorism as a science did not exist until B. F. Skinner addressed

Figure 1–2. The Skinner box.

Through many and repeated experiments, Skinner demonstrated

Operant Conditioning and Respondent Conditioning

Operant conditioning is the primary process through which

The process by which behavior is shaped and maintained through

Positive and Negative Reinforcement

The observation that specific animal behaviors could be increased

The process of strengthening and increasing a behavior is called

An event that follows a behavior and results in increasing that

SLPs are ethically charged to engage in _-_