Advertisement

The Psychological Record

, Volume 54, Issue 2, pp 275–291 | Cite as

Probability of Equivalence Formation: Familiar Stimuli and Training Sequence

  • Erik Arntzen
Article

Abstract

The present study was conducted to show how responding in accord with equivalence relations changes as a function of position of familiar stimuli, pictures, and with the use of nonsense syllables in an MTO-training structure. Fifty college students were tested for responding in accord with equivalence in an AB, CB, DB, and EB training structure. The results showed that familiar stimuli presented as A-stimuli gave the highest yields (10 of 10 participants), whereas introducing the pictures at the end of the training (as E-stimuli) gave lower yields (5 of 10), and using nonsense syllables gave even lower yields (4 of 10). In addition, when all stimuli were Greek/Arabic letters only, 3 of 10 participants responded in accord with equivalence. When familiar stimuli were A-stimuli, but with a requirement of using keys on the keyboard, only 4 of 10 subjects responded in accord with equivalence. Furthermore, there was a high correlation between responding in accord with equivalence and reports of class consistent naming. Reaction time data also showed a typical pattern, in which there was an increase from training to test and a decrease during testing.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. ANNETT, J. M., & LESLIE, J. C. (1995). Stimulus classes involving olfactory stimuli. The Psychological Record, 45, 439–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ARNTZEN, E., & HOLTH, P. (1997). Probability of stimulus equivalence as a function of training design. The Psychological Record, 47, 309–320.Google Scholar
  3. ARNTZEN, E., & HOLTH, P. (2000a). Differential equivalence test outcomes as a function of training structure and class number. The Psychological Record, 50, 603–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. ARNTZEN, E., & HOLTH, P. (2000b). Probability of stimulus equivalence as a function of class size vs. number of classes. The Psychological Record, 50, 79–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. BARNES-HOLMES, D., HAYES, S. C., & ROCHE, B. (2001). The (not so) strange death of stimulus equivalence. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 2, 35–41.Google Scholar
  6. BELANICH, J., & FIELDS, L. (1999). Tactual equivalence class formation and tactual-to-visual cross-modal transfer. The Psychological Record, 49, 75–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. BENTALL, R. P., JONES, R. M., & DICKINS, D. W. (1999). Errors and response latencies as a function of nodal distance in 5-member equivalence classes. The Psychological Record, 49, 93–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. CATANIA, A. C. (1980). Autoclitic processes and the structure of behavior. Behaviorism, 8, 175–186.Google Scholar
  9. CATANIA, A. C. (1986). On the difference between verbal and nonverbal behavior. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 4, 2–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. CULLINAN, V. A., BARNES-HOLMES, D., & SMEETS, P. M. (2000). A precursor to the relational evaluation procedure: Analyzing stimulus equivalence II. The Psychological Record, 50, 467–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DE ROSE, J. C. (1996). Controlling factors in conditional discriminations and tests of equivalence. In T. R. Zentall & P. M. Smeets (Eds.), Stimulus class formation in humans and animals (pp. 253–277). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. DEVANY, J. M., HAYES, S. C., & NELSON, R. O. (1986). Equivalence class formation in language-able and language-disabled children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 46, 243–257.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. DUGDALE, N., & LOWE, C. F. (2000). Testing for symmetry in the conditional discriminations of language-trained chimpanzees. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 73, 5–22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. EIKESETH, S., & SMITH, T. (1992). The development of functional and equivalence classes in high-functioning autistic children: The role of naming. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 58, 123–133.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. FIELDS, L., VARELAS, A., REEVE, K. F., BELANICH, J., WADHWA, P., DEROSSE, P., & ROSEN, D. (2000). Effects of prior conditional discrimination training, symmetry, transitivity, and equivalence testing on the emergence of new equivalence classes. The Psychological Record, 50, 443–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. FIELDS, L., & VERHAVE, T. (1987). The structure of equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 48, 317–332.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. FIELDS, L., VERHAVE, T., & FATH, S. (1984). Stimulus equivalence and transitive associations: A methodological analysis. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 42, 143–157.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. GREEN, G., & SAUNDERS, R. R. (1998). Stimulus equivalence. In K. A. Lattal & M. Perone (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in human operant behavior (pp. 229–262). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. HAYES, L. J., TILLEY, K. L., & HAYES, S. C. (1988). Extending equivalence and membership to gustatory stimuli. The Psychological Record, 38, 473–482.Google Scholar
  20. HAYES, S. C. (1989). Nonhumans have not yet shown stimulus equivalence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 385–392.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. HOLTH, P., & ARNTZEN, E. (1998). Stimulus familiarity and the delayed emergence of stimulus equivalence or consistent nonequivalence. The Psychological Record, 48, 81–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. HOLTH, P., & ARNTZEN, E. (2000). Reaction times and the emergence of class consistent responding: A case for precurrent responding? The Psychological Record, 50, 305–338.Google Scholar
  23. HORNE, P. J., & LOWE, C. F. (1996). On the origins of naming and other symbolic behavior. Joumal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 181–241.Google Scholar
  24. IMAM, A. A. (2001). Speed contingencies, number of stimulus presentations, and the nodality effect in equivalence formation. Joumal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 76, 265–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. LANE, S. D., & CRITCHFIELD, T. S. (1996). Verbal self-reports of emergent relations in a stimulus equivalence procedure. Joumal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 355–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. LANE, S. D., & CRITCHFIELD, T. S. (1998). Classifications of vowels and consonants by individuals with moderate and mental retardation: Development of arbitrary relations via matching-to-sample training with compound stimuli. Joumal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. LAZAR, R., DAVIS-LANG, D., & SANCHEZ, L. (1984). The formation of visual stimulus equivalence in children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 41, 251–266.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. LIPKINS, R., HAYES, S. C., & HAYES, L. J. (1993). Longitudinal study of the development of derived relations in an infant. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 56, 201–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. LOWE, C. F., HORNE, P. J., HARRIS, F. D. A., & RANDLE, V. R. L. (2002). Naming and categorization in young children: vocal tact training. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 78, 527–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. MANDELL, C., & SHEEN, V. (1994). Equivalence class formation as a function of the pronounceability of the sample stimulus. Behavioural Processes, 32, 29–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. MCINTIRE, K. D., CLEARY, J., & THOMPSON, T. (1987). Conditional relations by monkeys: Reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 47, 279–285.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. MCINTIRE, K. D., CLEARY, J., & THOMPSON, T. (1989). Reply to Saunders and to Hayes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 393–396.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. O’LEARY, C. A., & BUSH, K. M. (1996). Stimulus equivalence in the tactile modality. The Psychological Record, 46, 509–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. PEAR, J. J. (2001). The science of learning. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  35. PILGRIM, C., CHAMBERS, L., & GALIZIO, M. (1995). Reversal of baseline relations and stimulus equivalence: II. Children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 63, 225–238.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. RANDELL, T., & REMINGTON, B. (1999). Equivalence relations between visual stimuli: The functional role of naming. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71, 395–415.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. ROCHE, B., BARNES-HOLMES, D., SMEETS, P. M., BARNES-HOLMES, Y., & MCGEADY, S. (2000). Contextual control over derived transformation of discriminative and sexual arousal functions. The Psychological Record, 50, 267–291.Google Scholar
  38. SAUNDERS, K. J. (1989). Naming in conditional discrimination and stimulus equivalence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 379–384.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. SAUNDERS, K. J., & SPRADLIN, J. E. (1993). Conditional discrimination in mentally retarded subjects: Programming acquisition and learning set. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 60, 571–585.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. SAUNDERS, R. R., SAUNDERS, K. J., KIRKBY, K. C., & SPRADLIN, J. E. (1988). The merger and development of equivalence classes by unreinforced conditional selection of comparison stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 50, 145–162.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. SIDMAN, M. (1992). Equivalence relations: Some basic considerations. In S. C. Hayes & L. J. Hayes (Eds.), Understanding verbal relations (pp. 15–27). Reno, NV: Context Press.Google Scholar
  42. SIDMAN, M. (1994). Equivalence relations and behavior: A research story. Boston: Authors Cooperative.Google Scholar
  43. SIDMAN, M. (2000). Equivalence relations and the reinforcement contingency. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74, 127–146.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. SIDMAN, M., CRESSON, O., & WILLSON-MORRIS, M. (1974). Acquisition of matching to sample via mediated transfer. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 22, 261–273.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. SIDMAN, M., KIRK, B., & WILLSON-MORRIS, M. (1985). Six members stimulus classes generated by conditional-discrimination procedures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 43, 21–42.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. SIDMAN, M., & TAILBY, W. (1982). Conditional discrimination vs. matching to sample: An expansion of the testing paradigm. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 5–22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. SIDMAN, M., WILLSON-MORRIS, M., & KIRK, B. (1986). Matching-to-sample procedures and the development of equivalence relations: The role of naming. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 6, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. SKINNER, B. F. (1968). The technology of teaching. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
  49. SPENCER, T. J., & CHASE, P. N. (1996). Speed analysis of stimulus equivalence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 643–659.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. STROMER, R., & MACKAY, H. A. (1996). Naming and the formation of stimulus classes. In T. R. Zentall & P. M. Smeets (Eds.), Stimulus class formation in humans and animals (pp. 221–252). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. TONNEAU, F. (2001). Equivalence relations: A critical analysis. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 2, 1–33.Google Scholar
  52. WULFERT, E., DOUGHER, M. J., & GREENWAY, D. E. (1991). Protocol analysis of the correspondence of verbal behavior and equivalence class formation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56, 489–504.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Behavior Analysis International 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Akershus University CollegeSandvikaNorway

Personalised recommendations