Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Establishing stimulus classes in adults and children using a respondent-type training procedure: A follow-up study

  • Published:
The Psychological Record Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examined the effects of a successive stimulus pairing procedure (respondent training) on formation of conditional discriminations and equivalence classes. Different training protocols (linear, many-to-one, one-to-many), and training and test arrangements (simultaneous, simple-to-complex) were used. A simultaneous protocol was used in Experiment 1. During training, adults were exposed to multiple random series of stimulus pairs. Stimuli of the same pair were presented one after the other (e.g., A1 ➝B1, C1 ➝B1, A2➝B2, C2 ➝B2, A3 ➝B3, C3➝B3). These series were followed by a match-to-sample test series involving symmetry probes (e.g., B-A, B-C) mixed with equivalence probes (A-C). Experiments 2 through 4 involved preschool children. Experiment 2 was a modified replication of Experiment 1 (Observing A➝B and C➝B. Testing A-B, C-B, A-C, and vice versa). Experiment 3 was the same except that a simple-to-complex protocol was used (e.g., training A➝B, testing A-B and B-A, training C➝B, testing B-C and C-B, and testing A-C and C-A). Experiment 4 was the same as Experiment 3 except that only symmetry and equivalence relations were tested (e.g., training A➝B, testing B-A, training C➝B, testing B-C, and testing C-A). Symmetry and equivalence were obtained most quickly with adults trained on simultaneous many-to-one protocols. With children, however, the simultaneous protocol was not effective. The simple-to-complex protocol produced much better results which were virtually the same for all training arrangements (linear, many-to-one, one-to-many).

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

  • ADAMS, B. J., FIELDS, L., & VERHAVE, T. (1993). Effects of test order on intersubject variability during equivalence class formation. The Psychological Record, 43, 133–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BARNES, D. (1994). Stimulus equivalence and relational frame theory. The Psychological Record, 44, 91–124.

  • BARNES, D., BROWNE, M., SMEETS, P. M., & 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 

  • BARNES, D., & HOLMES, Y. (1991). Radical behaviorism, stimulus equivalence, and human cognition. The Psychological Record, 41, 19–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BARNES, D., & KEENAN, M. (1993). A transfer of functions through derived arbitrary and nonarbitrary stimulus relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 59, 61–81.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • BARNES, D., MCCULLAGH, P. D., & KEENAN, M. (1990). Equivalence class formation in non-hearing impaired and hearing impaired children. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 8, 19–30.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    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 

  • FIELDS, L., LANDON-JIMENEZ, D. V., BUFFINGTON, D. M., & ADAMS, B. J. (1995). Maintained nodal-distance effects in equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 64, 129–145.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • GREENWAY, D. E., DOUGHER, M. J., & WULFERT, E. (1996). Transfer of consequential functions via stimulus equivalence: Generalization to different testing contexts. The Psychological Record, 46, 131–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HAYES, L. J. (1992). Equivalence as a process. In S. C. Hayes & L. J. Hayes (Eds.), Understanding verbal relations (pp. 97–108). Reno, NV: Context Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • HAYES, S. C. (1991). A relational theory of stimulus equivalence. In L. J. Hayes & R. N. Chase (Eds.), Dialogues on verbal behavior (pp. 19–40). Reno, NV: Context Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • KENNEDY, C. H., & LAITINEN, R. (1988). Second-order conditional control of symmetrical and transitive stimulus relations: The influence of order effects. The Psychological Record, 38, 437–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LAZAR, R. (1977). Extending sequence-class membership with matching to sample. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 27, 381–392.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • LEADER, G., BARNES, D., & SMEETS, P. M. (1996). Establishing equivalence relations by using a respondent-type training procedure. The Psychological Record, 46, 685–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LYNCH, D. C., & CUVO, A. J. (1995). Stimulus equivalence instruction of fraction-decimal relations. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28, 115–126.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • MACDONALD, R. F., DIXON, L. S., & LEBLANC, J. M. (1986). Stimulus class formation following observational learning. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 6, 73–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAUNDERS, R. R., & GREEN, G. (1992). The nonequivalence of behavioral and mathematical equivalence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 57, 227–241.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • SAUNDERS, K. J., SAUNDERS, R. R., WILLIAMS, D. C., & SPRADLIN, J. E. (1993). An interaction of instructions and training design on stimulus class formation: Extending the analysis of equivalence. The Psychological Record, 43, 725–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAUNDERS, K. J., & SPRADLIN, J. E. (1989). Conditional discrimination in mentally retarded adults: The effect of training the component simple discriminations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 52, 1–12.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • SAUNDERS, R. R., WACHTER, J., & SPRADLIN, J. E. (1988). Establishing auditory stimulus control over an eight-member equivalence class via conditional discrimination procedures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 49, 95–115.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • SCHENK, J. J. (1995). Complex stimuli in nonreinforced simple discrimination tasks: Emergent simple and conditional discriminations. The Psychological Record, 45, 447–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

  • SIDMAN, M., & TAILBY, W. (1982). Conditional discrimination vs matching to sample: An extension of the testing paradigm. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 5–22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • SIDMAN, M., WYNNE, C. K., MAGUIRE, R. W., & BARNES, T. (1989). Functional classes and equivalence relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 52, 261–274.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • SIGURDARDOTTIR, Z. G., GREEN, G., & SAUNDERS, R. R. (1990). Equivalence classes generated by sequence training. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 53, 47–63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • SMEETS, P. M., & BARNES, D. (1995). Emergent conditional discriminations in children and adults: Stimulus equivalence derived from simple discriminations. Unpublished paper.

  • SMEETS, P. M., BARNES, D., SCHENK, J. J., & DARCHEVILLE, J. C. (1996). Emergent simple discriminations and conditional relations in children, intellectually impaired adults, and normal adults. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49B, 201–219.

    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 

  • SPRADLIN, J. E., & SAUNDERS, R. R. (1986). The development of stimulus classes using match-to-sample procedures: Sample classification versus comparison classification. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 6, 41–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • STODDARD, L. T., & MCILVANE, W. J. (1986). Stimulus control research and developmentally disabled individuals. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 6, 155–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • URCUIOLI, P. J., & ZENTALL, T. R. (1993). A test of comparison-stimulus substitutability following one-to-many matching by pigeons. The Psychological Record, 43, 745–759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • URCUIOLI, P. J., ZENTALL, T. R., & DEMARSE, T. (1995). Transfer of derived sample-comparison relations by pigeons following many-to-one versus one-to-many matching with identical training relations. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48B, 158–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • VAUGHAN, W. (1988). Formation of equivalence sets in pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 14, 36–42.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Behavior Analysis Unit, Department of Psychology, Leiden University, P. O. Box 9555, 2300 RB Leiden, Holland, Netherlands

    Paul M. Smeets

  2. Department of Applied Psychology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland

    Geraldine Leader & Dermot Barnes

Authors
  1. Paul M. Smeets
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Geraldine Leader
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dermot Barnes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Paul M. Smeets or Dermot Barnes.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Smeets, P.M., Leader, G. & Barnes, D. Establishing stimulus classes in adults and children using a respondent-type training procedure: A follow-up study. Psychol Rec 47, 285–308 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395226

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395226

Search

Navigation