Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Derived Relational Responding As An Operant: The Effects Of Between-Session Feedback

  • Published:
The Psychological Record Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Relational Frame Theory (RFT) views derived relational responding as an overarching operant class of behavior. One approach to the analysis of derived relations from the RFT perspective, therefore, would be to examine systematically the effects of differential consequences on derived responding. In Experiment 1, 15 undergraduate subjects were divided into three conditions (5 subjects in each condition). In each condition subjects were exposed to 11 sessions, and in each session they were trained and tested for the formation of combinatorially entailed relations. In Condition 1, no differential consequences were delivered after any session. In Condition 2, responseindependent, positive feedback was delivered after each of the first five sessions (i.e., the experimenter said to the subject “You are doing very well”) and response-independent, negative feedback was delivered after Sessions 6 to 10 (i.e., the experimenter said to the subject “You are doing badly”). Condition 3 was similar to Condition 2, except that the first five sessions were followed by negative feedback and the remaining sessions were followed by positive feedback. The results showed that (a) delivering positive feedback before negative feedback attenuated relational responding relative to the negative before positive feedback condition, and (b) delivering differential feedback produced more frequent relational responding relative to the nofeedback condition. Experiment 2 replicated Conditions 2 and 3 of Experiment 1, except that the positive and negative feedback was replaced by accurate and inaccurate feedback, respectively. During accurate feedback, subjects were told “You’re doing well” if responding was above 50% correct and were told “You’re doing badly” if responding was less than 50% correct. This was reversed for inaccurate feedback. Experiment 3 replicated Experiment 2 except that the feedback was delivered automatically via the computer. Experiment 4 involved a control whereby the test phase was unrelated to baseline training. The feedback delivered remained identical to that of the previous experiment. Experiment 5 replicated Experiment 3, but the feedback was precise in that, following the test phase, subjects received a point for every correct response made. The results showed that, in general, derived relational responding was highly sensitive to the response-contingent feedback and this responding was more frequent when precise feedback was used. Overall, the data are consistent with the suggestion that derived relational responding may be viewed as generalized operant behavior.

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

    Google Scholar 

  • BARNES, D. (1996). Naming as a technical term: Sacrificing behavior analysis at the altar of popularity. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of behavior, 65, 264–267.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • BARNES, D., & ROCHE, B. (1996). Relational frame theory and stimulus equivalence are fundamentally different: A reply to Saunders’ commentary. The Psychological Record, 46, 489–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BARNES, D., & HAMPSON, P. (1993). Stimulus equivalence and connectionism: The implications for behaviour analysis and cognitive science. The Psychological Record, 43, 617–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DYMOND, S., & BARNES, D. (1995). A transformation of self-discrimination response functions in accordance with the arbitrarily applicable relations of sameness, more-than, and less-than. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 64, 163–184.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • DYMOND, S., & BARNES, D. (1996). A transformation of self-discrimination response functions in accordance with the arbitrarily applicable relations of sameness and opposition. The Psychological Record, 46, 271–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • HAYES, S. C. (1992). Verbal relations, time and suicide. In Steven C. Hayes & Linda J. Hayes (Eds.), Understanding verbal relations (pp. 109–118). Reno, NV: Context Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.), Behaviour Analysis of Language and Cognition (pp. 9–30). Reno, NV: Context Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • LIPKENS, G., HAYES, S. C., & HAYES, L. J. (1992). Longitudinal study of the development of derived relations in an infant. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 56, 201–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PILGRIM, C., & GALIZIO, M. (1990). Relations between baseline contingencies and equivalence probe performances. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 54, 213–224.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • ROCHE, B., & BARNES, D. (1996). Arbitrarily applicable relational responding and human sexual categorization: A critical test of the derived difference relation. The Psychological Record, 46, 451–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ROCHE, B., & BARNES, D. (1997). A transformation of respondently conditioned function in accordance with arbitrarily applicable relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behaviour, 67, 275–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • STEELE, D. L., & HAYES, S. C. (1991). Stimulus equivalence and arbitrarily applicable relational responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behaviour, 56, 519–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WILLIAMS, D., SAUNDERS, K. J., SAUNDERS, R. R., & SPRADLIN, J. E. (1995). Unreinforced conditional selection within three-choice conditional discriminations. The Psychological Record, 45, 613–629.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Behavior Analysis and Cognitive Science Unit, Department of Applied Psychology, National University of Ireland Cork, Cork, Ireland

    Olive Healy & Dermot Barnes

  2. Leiden University, The Netherlands

    Paul M. Smeets

Authors
  1. Olive Healy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dermot Barnes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul M. Smeets
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This research was conducted as part of Olive Healy’s doctoral research program under the supervision of Dermot Barnes. Portions of these data were presented at the Symposium on Stimulus Equivalence, at the Annual Conference of the Experimental Analysis of Behaviour Group, London, March, 1996. We thank Bill Dube and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful and constructive comments on an earlier version of the current work.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Healy, O., Barnes, D. & Smeets, P.M. Derived Relational Responding As An Operant: The Effects Of Between-Session Feedback. Psychol Rec 48, 511–536 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395286

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395286

Search

Navigation