The Behavior Analyst

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 3–9 | Cite as

Is a New Definition of Verbal Behavior Necessary in Light of Derived Relational Responding?

  • Sam Leigland


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barnes, D., & Roche, B. (1996). Relational frame theory and stimulus equivalence are fundamentally different: A reply to Saunders’ commentary. The Psychological Record, 46, 489–507.Google Scholar
  2. Boelens, H. (1994). A traditional account of stimulus equivalence. The Psychological Record, 44, 587–605.Google Scholar
  3. Catania, A. C. (1986). On the difference between verbal and nonverbal behavior. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 4, 2–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Catania, A. C. (1992). Learning (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  5. Chiesa, M. (1994). Radical behaviorism: The philosophy and the science. Boston: Authors Cooperative.Google Scholar
  6. Day, W. F. (1980). The historical antecedents of contemporary behaviorism. In R. W. Rieber & K. Salzinger (Eds.), Psychology: Theoretical-historical perspectives (pp. 203–262). New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hall, G. A., & Chase, P. N. (1991). The relationship between stimulus equivalence and verbal behavior. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 9, 107–119.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Hayes, S. C. (1991). A relational control theory of stimulus equivalence. In L. J. Hayes & P. N. Chase (Eds.), Dialogues on verbal behavior (pp. 19–40). Reno, NV: Context Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hayes, S. C. (1994). Relational frame theory: A functional approach to verbal events. In S. C. Hayes, L. J. Hayes, M. Sato, & K. Ono (Eds.), Behavior analysis of language and cognition (pp. 9–30). Reno, NV: Context Press.Google Scholar
  10. Hayes, S. C., & Hayes, L. J. (1992). Verbal relations and the evolution of behavior analysis. American Psychologist, 47, 1383–1395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hayes, S. C., & Wilson, K. G. (1993). Some applied implications of a contemporary behavior-analytic account of verbal events. The Behavior Analyst, 16, 283–301.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Hayes, S. C., & Wilson, K. G. (1994). Acceptance and commitment therapy: Altering the verbal support for experiential avoidance. The Behavior Analyst, 17, 289–303.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Horne, P. J., & Lowe, C. F. (1996). On the origins of naming and other symbolic behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 185–241.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Leigland, S. (1996a). An experimental analysis of ongoing verbal behavior: Reinforcement, verbal operants, and superstitious behavior. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 13, 79–104.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Leigland, S. (1996b). The functional analysis of psychological terms: In defense of a research project. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 13, 105–122.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Roche, B., & Barnes, D. (1996). Arbitrarily applicable relational responding and sexual categorization: A critical test of the derived difference relation. The Psychological Record, 46, 451–475.Google Scholar
  17. Rorty, R. (1991). Objectivity, relativism, and truth: Philosophical papers Vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Rosenfarb, I. S. (1992). A behavior analytic interpretation of the therapeutic relationship. The Psychological Record, 42, 341–354.Google Scholar
  19. Saunders, R. R. (1996). From review to commentary on Roche and Barnes: Toward a better understanding of equivalence in the context of relational frame theory. The Psychological Record, 46, 477–487.Google Scholar
  20. Schusterman, R. J., & Kastak, D. (1993). A California sea hon (Zalophus californianus) is capable of forming equivalence relations. The Psychological Record, 43, 823–839.Google Scholar
  21. Sidman, M. (1994). Equivalence relations and behavior: A research story. Boston: Authors Cooperative.Google Scholar
  22. Sidman, M., Kirk, B., & Willson-Morris, M. (1985). Six-member stimulus classes generated by conditional-discrimination procedures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 43, 21–42.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Skinner, B. F. (1945). The operational analysis of psychological terms. Psychological Review, 52, 270–277, 291–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: The Free Press/Macmillan.Google Scholar
  25. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Steele, D. M., & Hayes, S. C. (1991). Stimulus equivalence and arbitrarily applicable relational responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56, 519–555.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Stemmer, N. (1995). Do we need an alternative theory of verbal behavior?: A reply to Hayes and Wilson. The Behavior Analyst, 18, 357–362.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Sundberg, M. L., Michael, J., Partington, J. W., & Sundberg, C. A. (1996). The role of automatic reinforcement in early language acquisition. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 13, 21–37.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Twyman, J. S. (1996). The functional independence of impure mands and tacts of abstract stimulus properties. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 13, 1–19.PubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyGonzaga UniversitySpokaneUSA

Personalised recommendations