Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Nonautomated Procedures in Derived Stimulus Relations Research: A Methodological Note

  • Article
  • Published:
The Psychological Record Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Nonautomated or tabletop procedures are widely used in derived stimulus relations research. These procedures offer several advantages to the researcher, not least of which is the interactive format of the task. However, this feature is often criticized because of the possibility of experimenter cuing and imprecise experimental control over task presentations. These limitations, combined with the considerable procedural differences that exist between studies, suggest that a review of nonautomated procedures in derived stimulus relations research is warranted. The present paper will consider some of the methodological features of nonautomated procedures including experimental setting and sessions, task format, experimenter training, response definition, reinforcer delivery, intertrial intervals, and interobserver reliability. Basic methodological safeguards will be proposed to ensure that experimental control is rigorously maintained in future research with nonautomated procedures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • BARNES, D., BROWNE, M., SMEETS, R., & ROCHE, B. (1995). A transfer of functions and a conditional transfer of functions through equivalence relations in three- to six-year-old children. The Psychological Record, 45, 405–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BOELENS, H. (1990). Emergent simple discrimination in children. Behavioural Processes, 22, 13–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • BOELENS, H., VAN DEN BROEK, M., & CALMEYN, S. (2003). Is children’s symmetric matching-to-sample the product of experience with spoken names? The Psychological Record, 53, 593–617.

    Google Scholar 

  • BRADY, N. C., & MCLEAN, L. K. S. (2000). Emergent symbolic relations in speakers and nonspeakers. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 21, 197–214.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • BUSH, K. M. (1993). Stimulus equivalence and cross-modal transfer. The Psychological Record, 43, 567–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CARR, D., & FELCE, D. (2000). Application of stimulus equivalence to language intervention for individuals with severe linguistic disabilities. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 25, 181–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CARR, D., WILKINSON, K. M., BLACKMAN, D., & MCILVANE, W. J. (2000). Equivalence classes in individuals with minimal verbal repertoires. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74, 101–115.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • DEGRANDPRE, R. J., BICKEL, W. K., & HIGGINS, S. T. (1992). Emergent equivalence relations between interoceptive (drug) and exteroceptive (visual) stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 58, 9–18.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • DE ROSE, J. O., MCILVANE, W. J., DUBE, W. V., GALPIN, V. O., & STODDARD, L. T. (1988). Emergent simple discrimination established by indirect relation to differential consequences. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 50, 1–20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • DUBE, W. V., MCILVANE, W. J., MACKAY, H. A., & STODDARD, L. T. (1987). Stimulus class membership established via stimulus-reinforcer relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 47, 159–175.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • DUGDALE, N., & JOHNSON, S. (2002). Unreinforced conditional selection by two-year olds in a six-comparison matching task. The Psychological Record, 52, 159–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DYMOND, S. (2000, March). Nonautomated procedures in derived stimulus relations research with children. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior Group, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • DYMOND, S., & CRITCHFIELD, T. S. (2001). Neither dark age nor renaissance: Research and authorships trends in the experimental analysis of human behavior (1980–1999). The Behavior Analyst, 24, 241–253.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • DYMOND, S., & REHFELDT, R. A. (2001). Supplemental measures of derived stimulus relations. Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin, 19, 8–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • GAROTTI, M., DESOUZA, D. G., DEROSE, J. D., MOLINA, R. O., & GIL, M. S. A. (2000). Reorganization of equivalence classes after reversal of baseline relations. The Psychological Record, 50, 35–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GOYOS, C. (2000). Equivalence class formation via common reinforcers among preschool children. The Psychological Record, 50, 629–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HAYES, S. O., BARNES-HOLMES, D., & ROCHE, B. (2001), Relational Frame Theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Kluwer Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • JOHNSTON, J. M., & PENNYPACKER, H. S. (1993). Strategies and tactics of human behavioral research (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • JORDAN, C. R., PILGRIM, C., & GALIZIO, M. (2001). Conditional discrimination and stimulus equivalence in young children: Comparison of three baseline training procedures. Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin, 19, 3–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • KAHNG, S., & IWATA, B. A. (1998). Computerized systems for collecting real-time observational data. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 253–261.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • KAZDIN, A. E. (2001). Research design in clinical psychology (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • LATTAL, K. A., & GLEESON, S. (1990). Response acquisition with delayed reinforcement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 16, 27–39.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • LEADER, G., BARNES-HOLMES, D., & SMEETS, P. M. (2000). Establishing equivalence relations using a respondent-type training procedure. III. The Psychological Record, 50, 63–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LIPKENS, R., HAYES, S. O., & HAYES, L. J. (1993). Longitudinal study of the development of derived relations in an infant. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 56, 201–239.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • LIONELLO-DENOLF, K. M., & MCILVANE, W. J. (2003). Rebirth of the Shriver Automated Teaching Laboratory. Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin, 21, 12–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • MILTENBERGER, R. G., RAPP, J. T., & LONG, E. S. (1999). A low-tech method for conducting real-time recording. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 119–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’DONNELL, J., & SAUNDERS, K. J. (2003). Equivalence relations in individuals with language limitations and mental retardation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 80, 131–157.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • OSBORNE, J. G., & CALHOUN, D. O. (1998). Themes, taxons, and trial types in children’s matching to sample: Methodological considerations. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 68, 35–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • OVERMAN, W. H., BACHEVALIER, J., TURNER, M., & PEUSTER, A. (1992). Object recognition versus object discrimination. Comparison between human infants and infant monkeys. Behavioral Neuroscience, 106, 15–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • PILGRIM, C. (1998). The human subject. In K. A. Lattal & M. Perone (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in human operant behavior (pp. 15–44). New York: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • PILGRIM, O., & GALIZIO, M. (1996). Stimulus equivalence: A class of correlations or a correlation of classes? In T. R. Zentall & P. M. Smeets (Eds.), Stimulus class formation in humans and animals (pp. 173–195). North Holland: Elsevier Science.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • PILGRIM, O., JACKSON, J., & GALIZIO, M. (2000). Acquisition of arbitrary conditional discriminations by young normally developing children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 73, 177–193.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • POLING, A. (1985). Reporting interobserver agreement: Another difference in applied and basic behavioral psychology. Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin, 1, 5–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • POLING, A., METHOT, L. L., & LESAGE, M. G. (1995). Fundamentals of behavior analytic research. New York: Plenum.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • REHFELDT, R. A., LATIMORE, D., & STROMER, R. (2003). Observational learning and the formation of classes of reading skills by individuals with autism and other developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 25, 333–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • REID, D. H., & GREEN, C. W. (1990). Staff training. In J. L. Matson (Ed.), Handbook of behaviour modification with the mentally retarded (2nd ed.) (pp. 71–90). New York: Plenum Pr

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • SAUNDERS, K. J., & WILLIAMS, D. O. (1998). Stimulus control procedures. In K. A. Lattal & M. Perone (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in human operant behavior (pp. 193–228). New York: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • SCHENK, J. J. (1993). Emergent conditional discrimination in children: Matching to compound stimuli. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46B, 345–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • SCHENK, J. J. (1994). Emergent relations of equivalence generated by outcome-specific consequences in conditional discrimination. The Psychological Record, 44, 537–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SCHENK, J. J. (1995). Complex stimuli in nonreinforced simple discrimination tasks: Emergent simple and conditional discriminations. The Psychological Record, 45, 477–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SIDMAN, M. (1971). Reading and auditory-visual equivalences. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 14, 5–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • SIDMAN, M. (1994). Equivalence relations and behavior: A research story. Boston, MA: Author’s Cooperative.

    Google Scholar 

  • SMEETS, P. M., BARNES, D., & ROCHE, B. (1997). Functional equivalence in children: Derived stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus relations. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 66, 1–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • SMEETS, P. M., & BARNES-HOLMES, D. (2003). Children’s emergent preferences for soft drinks: Stimulus equivalence and transfer. Journal of Economic Psychology, 24, 603–618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SMEETS, P. M., BARNES-HOLMES, Y, AKINPAR, D., & BARNES-HOLMES, D. (2003). Reversal of equivalence relations. The Psychological Record, 53, 91–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • SMEETS, P. M., DYMOND, S., & BARNES-HOLMES, D. (2000). Instructions, stimulus equivalence, and stimulus sorting: Effects of sequential testing arrangements and a default option. The Psychological Record, 50, 339–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SMEETS, P. M., SCHENK, J. J., & BARNES, D. (1995). Establishing arbitrary stimulus classes via identity-matching training and non-reinforced matching with complex stimuli. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48B, 311–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • SMEETS, P. M., & STRIEFEL, S. (1994). A revised blocked-trial procedure for establishing arbitrary matching in children. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47B, 241–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • STODDARD, L. T. (1982). An investigation of automated methods for teaching severely retarded individuals. In N. R. Ellis (Ed.), International review of research in mental retardation (pp. 163–207). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • STROMER, R., MACKAY, H. A., MCVAY, A. A., & FOWLER, T. (1998). Written lists as mediating stimuli in the matching-to-sample performances of individuals with mental retardation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 1–19.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • STROMER, R., MACKAY, H. A., & REMINGTON, R. (1996). Naming, the formation of stimulus classes, and applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 409–431.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • TIERNEY, K. J., DE LARGY, P., & BRACKEN, M. (1995). Formation of an equivalence class incorporating haptic stimuli. The Psychological Record, 45, 431–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WEAVER, A. D., WATSON, T. S., CASHWELL, O., HINDS, J., & FASCIO, S. (2003). The effects of ability- and effort-based praise on task persistence and task performance. The Behavior Analyst Today, 4(2), 127–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ZYGMONT, D. M., LAZÁR, R. M., DUBE, W. V., & MCILVANE, W. J. (1992). Teaching arbitrary matching via sample stimulus-control shaping to young children and mentally retarded individuals. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 57, 109–117.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, APU, East Road, Cambridge, CB1 1PT, UK

    Simon Dymond

  2. Southern Illinois University, USA

    Ruth Anne Rehfeldt

  3. Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Jacqueline Schenk

Authors
  1. Simon Dymond
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ruth Anne Rehfeldt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jacqueline Schenk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simon Dymond.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dymond, S., Rehfeldt, R.A. & Schenk, J. Nonautomated Procedures in Derived Stimulus Relations Research: A Methodological Note. Psychol Rec 55, 461–481 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395521

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395521

Search

Navigation