Abstract
In recent years, behavior-analytic studies have been examining what teaching methods could lead to the emergence of new behavior that is not directly taught (i.e., generative responding; LaFrance & Tarbox, 2020). In this literature, two procedures, multiple-exemplar training (MET) and multiple-exemplar instruction (MEI) are often mentioned but not well defined and often get conflated with one another. The purpose of the current study was to replicate and extend a recent study by LaFrance et al. (2021) that examined MEI on emergence and generalized behavior. More specifically, the current study sought to examine the effects of MET on these same variables to further elucidate the distinction between these two procedures. Participants included two children with developmental disabilities that were taught to respond as a listener to multiple sets of stimuli. We probed for emergence and generalization both prior to and during MET. Our results showed that MET led to the emergence of stimulus generalization for all sets for both participants, but the data did not show evidence of emergent behavior. Our data, along with findings from LaFrance et al (2021), support the distinction made by LaFrance and Tarbox (2020): despite their terminological similarity, MET and MEI are indeed separate procedures that lead to distinct outcomes.