Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Equivalence Outcome in Single Subjects as a Function of Training Structure

  • Published:
The Psychological Record Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous studies comparing groups of subjects have indicated differential probabilities of stimulus equivalence outcome as a function of training structure. Both one-to-many (OTM) and many-to-one (MTO) training structures seem to produce stimulus equivalence more often than a linear series training structure. The purpose of the present study was to explore whether or not corresponding differential probabilities of equivalence outcome as a function of training structure can be demonstrated in the performances of single subjects. In Experiment 1, equivalence outcome was tested successively following training according to each of the three training structures. All subjects responded in accord with equivalence following the OTM training structure independent of the training order, except for 1 subject who did not respond in accord with equivalence following neither of the three training structures. Furthermore, 2 subjects demonstrated individual success following both one-to-many and many-to-one training even when they did not demonstrate success following linear series training, while the reverse never happened. In Experiment 2, equivalence outcome was tested successively following training according to a many-to-one and a one-to-many training structure with both 2 and 3 classes of stimuli. The results showed that all subjects responded in accord with equivalence following the OTM training structure, while 2 subjects did not respond in accord with equivalence following the MTO training structure. In Experiment 3, equivalence outcome was tested successively following training according to a many-to-one training structure and one-to-many training structure with both 3 and 4 members in each class. In accord with the results of Arntzen and Holth (1997) the present results indicated a superiority of the one-to-many over alternative training structures as regards the probability of an equivalence outcome. There was no difference in the probability of an equivalence outcome following one-to-many and many-to-one as a function of increasing number of members. The difference in number of comparisons connected to each sample as a consequence of the dissimilarity in the training structures is discussed as a possible explanation for the difference in equivalence outcome.

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

  • ARNTZEN, E., & HOLTH, P. (1997). Probability of stimulus equivalence as a function of training design. The Psychological Record, 47, 309–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • ARNTZEN, E., & HOLTH, P. (2000). Probability of stimulus equivalence as a function of class size vs. number of classes. The Psychological Record, 50, 79–104.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • BUFFINGTON, D. M., FIELDS, L., & ADAMS, B. J. (1997). Enhancing equivalence class formation by pretraining of other equivalence classes. The Psychological Record, 47, 69–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FIELDS, L., ADAMS, B. J., NEWMAN, S., & VERHAVE, T. (1990). The effects of nodality on the formation of equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 53, 345–358.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • FIELDS, L., HOBBIE, S. A., ADAMS, B. J., & REEVE, K. F. (1999) Effects of training directionality and class size on equivalence class formation by adults. The Psychological Record, 49, 703–724.

    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 

  • FIELDS, L., REEVE, K. F., ROSEN, D., VARELAS, A., ADAMS, B. J., BELANICH, J., & HOBBIE, S. A. (1997). Using the simultaneous protocol to study equivalence class formation: the facilitating effects of nodal number and size of previously established equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 67, 367–389.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • HOLTH, P., & ARNTZEN, E. (1998). Stimulus familiarity and the delayed emergence of stimulus equivalence or consistent nonequivalence. The Psychological Record, 48, 81–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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, R. R., DRAKE, K. M., & SPRADLIN, J. E. (1999). Equivalence class development, expansion, and modification in preschool children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71, 195–214.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • SAUNDERS, R. R., & GREEN, G. (1999). A discrimination analysis of training structure effects on stimulus equivalence outcomes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 72, 117–137.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • SIDMAN, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • SIDMAN, M. (1987). Two choices are not enough. Behavior Analysis, 22, 11–18.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • SPENCER, T. J., & CHASE, P. N. (1996). Speed analysis of stimulus equivalence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 643–659.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  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 

  • URCUIOLI, P. J., ZENTALL, T. R., JACKSON-SMITH, P., & STEIRN, J. N. (1989). Evidence for common coding in many-to-one matching: Retention, intertrial interference, and transfer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 15, 264–273.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Per Holth

    Present address: Center for Early Intervention, Oslo, Norway

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Akershus University College, PO Box 372, 1301, Sandvika, Norway

    Erik Arntzen & Per Holth

Authors
  1. Erik Arntzen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Per Holth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erik Arntzen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Arntzen, E., Holth, P. Equivalence Outcome in Single Subjects as a Function of Training Structure. Psychol Rec 50, 603–628 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395374

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395374

Search

Navigation