Investigating the Emergence of Equivalent Relationships with Mutually Exclusive Training Structures
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/0102.3772e3525Keywords:
Stimulus equivalence, Excluding classes, Symbolic behavior, Stimulus controlAbstract
This study investigated equivalence classes formation from conditional discrimination training structures that correspond to mutually exclusive emerging relationships. A total of 10 college students participated in two experiments. Trained relations were B1A1, B2A2, B3A3, D1C1, D2C2, D3C3, B1C2, B2C1, B3C3, D1A1, D2A2 and D3A3. Relations AC, CA, BD and DB were tested. Experiment II differed from Experiment I in that it included a review of training relations. The results indicated class formation for seven of the 10 participants, without significant differences between the experiments. However, different classes were established for the participants of both experiments, suggesting that the training order was not enough to determine which equivalence classes would be formed.
Downloads
References
Almeida, J. H., & Haydu, V. B. (2011). Reorganization of equivalence classes: Analysis of reversed baseline relations. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 24(3), 609-620.
Bortoloti, R., Rodrigues, N. C., Cortez, M. D., Pimentel, N., & de Rose, J. C. (2013). Overtraining increases the strength of equivalence stimulus. Psychology & Neuroscience, 6(3), 357-364.
Carvalho, M. P., & de Rose, J. C. (2014). Understanding racial attitudes through the stimulus equivalence paradigm. The Psychological Record, 64(3), 527-536.
Dickins, D. W., Bentall, R. P., & Smith, A. B. (1993). The role of individual stimulus names in the emergence of equivalence relations: The effects of paired-associates training between names. The Psychological Record, 43, 713-724.
Dickins, T. E., & Dickins, D. W. (2001). Symbols, stimulus equivalence and the origins of language. Behavior and Philosophy, 29, 221-244.
Doran, E., & Fields, L. (2012). All stimuli are equal, but some are more equal than others: Measuring relational preferences within an equivalence class.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior , 98, 243-256.
Ferreira, P. R. S., Domeniconi, C., & de Rose, J. C. C. (2010). As extensões do tacto segundo a concepção de propriedade de estímulo. Acta Comportamentalia, 18, 257-278.
Fields, L., Adams, B. J., Verhave, T., & Newman, S. (1990). The effects of nodality on the formation of equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 53(3), 345-358. http://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1990.53-345
Fields, L., Arntzen, E., Nartey, R. K., & Eilifsen, C. (2012). Effects of a meaningful a discriminative, and a meaningless stimulus on equivalence class formation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 97, 163-181.
Folsta, A. G., & de Rose, J. C. (2007). Rearrangement of equivalence classes after reversal of a single baseline relation: Influence of class size. Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin, 25, 1-5.
Garotti, M., & de Rose, J. C. (2007). Reorganization of equivalence classes: Evidence for contextual control by baseline reviews before probes. The Psychological Record, 57, 87-102.
Garotti, M., de Souza, D. G., de Rose, J. C., Molina, R. C., & Gil, M. S. A. (2000). Reorganization of equivalence classes after reversal of baseline relations. The Psychological Record, 40, 35-48.
Mackay, H. A., Wilkinson, K. M., Farrell, C., & Serna, R.W. (2011). Evaluating merger and intersection of equivalence classes with one member in common.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 96, 87-105.
Nevin, J. A. (1992). An integrative model for the study of behavioral momentum. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 57, 301-316.
Pilgrim, C., & Galizio, M. (1995). Reversal of baseline relations and stimulus equivalence: I Adults. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 63, 225-238.
Pilgrim, C., Chambers, L., & Galizio, M. (1995). Reversal of baseline relations and stimulus equivalence: II Children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 63, 230-254.
Saunders, R. R., & Green, G. (1999). A discrimination analysis of training-structure effects on stimulus equivalence outcomes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 72, 117-137.
Sidman, M. (1971). Reading and auditory-visual equivalences. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 14, 5-13.
Sidman, M. (2000). Equivalence relations and the reinforcement contingency. Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74, 127-146.
Sidman, M., Cresson, O., Jr., & Willson-Moris, M. (1974). Acquisition of matching-to-sample via mediated transfer. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 22, 261-273.
Sidman, M., Rauzin, R., Lazar, R., Cunningham, S., Tailby, W., & Carrigan, P. (1982). A search for symmetry in the conditional discriminations of rhesus monkeys, baboons and children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 23-44.
Sidman, M., & Tailby, W. (1982). Conditional discriminations vs. matching-to-sample: An expansion of the testing paradigm. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 5-22.
Skinner, B. F. (1957).Verbal behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Smith, A. B., Dickins, D. W., & Bentall, R. P. (1996). The role of individual stimulus names in the emergence of equivalence relations II: The effects of interfering tasks prior to and after tests for emergent relations. The Psychological Record, 46, 109-130.
Spradlin, J. E., Cotter, V. W., & Baxley, N. (1973). Establishing a conditional discrimination without direct training: A study of transfer with retarded adolescents. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 77, 556-556
