Abstract
In an earlier work (Gomez, Barnes-Holmes, & Luciano, 2001), it was found that although generalized break equivalence was achieved for 3 subjects (i.e., responding to new stimulus sets producing symmetry and transitivity but not equivalence; Cx-Ay, Cy-Ax), only 1 subject showed this pattern of responding during the first test exposure, and 2 additional subjects did not produce the derived pattern. The present study attempted to develop a procedure that produces generalized break equivalence more effectively than in our previous research. To achieve this goal three experiments were conducted varying the contextual cues used for the abstraction of the Generalized Break Equivalence Pattern (Gbep). In Experiment 1, the main contextual cue consisted of one, two, three, or four asterisks to differentiate each type of relation (i.e., one for A-B, B-A; two for B-C, C-B; three for A-C; four for C-A). Four subjects produced the Gbep, and the most frequent errors were produced on the A-C relation. In Experiment 2 the contextual cue was that the C stimuli were formally different from the A and B stimuli. Three subjects produced the Gbep and the most common errors were produced on C-B relation. Finally, in Experiment 3 an “explicit” contextual cue appeared only on C-A trials. All subjects showed the Gbep (2 of them in the first test to which they were exposed).These data extend those found earlier (Gömez et al., 2001) and support the generalized operant nature of derived relational responding. Applied implications are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
BARNES, Q., & Roche, B. (1996). Relational frame theory and stimulus equivalence are fundamentally different: A reply to Saunders’ commentary. The Psycological Record, 46, 489–507.
BARNES-HOLMES, D., & BARNES-HOLMES, Y. (2000). Explaining complex behavior: Two perspectives on the concept of generalized operant classes. The Psychological Record, 50, 251–265.
BOELENS, H. (1996). Accounting for stimulus equivalence: Reply to Hayes and Wilson. The Psychological Record, 46, 237–242.
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.
BUSH, K. M., SIDMAN, M., & De ROSE, T. (1989). Contextual control of emergent equivalence relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 29–45.
DUBE, W. V., & MCILVANE, W. J. (1996). Some implications of a stimulus control topography analysis for emergent behavior and stimulus classes. In T. R. ZENTALL & R M. SMEETS (Eds.), Stimulus class formation in humans and animals (pp. 197–217). Elsevier Science B.V.
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. Erratum, 66, 348.
ETZEL, B. C., & LEBLANC, J. M. (1979). The simplest treatment alternative: The law of parsimony applied to choosing appropriate instructional control and errorless-learning procedures for the difficult-to-teach child. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 9, 361–382.
FIELDS, L., VARELAS, A., REEVE, K. F., BELANICH, J., WADHWA, P., DEROSE, 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.
FOLLETTE, W. C. (1998). Expanding the domains of clinical behaviorism: A comment on Dougher. Behavior Therapy, 29, 593–601.
GAROTTI, M., DESOUZA, D. G., DEROSE, J. C, MOLINA, R. C., & GIL, M. S. A. (2000). Reorganization of equivalence classes after reversal of baseline relations. The Psychological Record, 50, 35–48.
GATCH, M. B., & OSBORNE, J. G. (1989). Transfer of contextual stimulus function via equivalence class development. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 369–378.
GOMEZ, S., BARNES-HOLMES, D., & LUCIANO, M. C. (2001). Generalized break equivalence I. The Psychological Record, 51, 131–150.
GOMEZ, S., HUERTA, E., BARNES, D., LUCIANO, M. C, & SMEETS, P. M. (1999). Breaking equivalence relations. Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin, 173, 1–4.
GREEN, G., STROMER, R., & MACKAY, H. A. (1993). Relational learning in stimulus sequences. The Psychological Record, 43, 599–615.
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.
HAYES, S. C., GIFFORD, E. V., & WILSON, K. G. (1996). Stimulus classes and stimulus relations: Arbitrarily applicable relational responding as an operant. In T. R. ZENTALL & P. M. SMEETS (Eds.), Stimulus class formation in humans and animals (pp. 279–299). Elsevier Science B.V.
HAYES, S. C., & HAYES, L. J. (1989). The verbal action of the listener as a basis for rule-governance. In S. C. HAYES (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior. Cognition, contingencies and instructional control (pp. 153–190). New YorK: Plenum.
HEALY O., BARNES, D., & SMEETS, P. M. (1998). Derived relational responding as an operant: The effects of between-session feedback. The Psychological Record, 48, 511–536.
HEALY, O, BARNES-HOLMES, D., & SMEETS, P. M. (2000). Derived relational responding as generalized operant behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74, 207–227.
KOHLENBERG, B. S., HAYES, S. C., & HAYES, L. J. (1991). The transfer of contextual control over equivalence classes through equivalence classes: A possible model of social stereotyping. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56, 505–518.
LANCIONI, G. E., & SMEETS, P. M. (1986). Procedures and parameters of errorless discrimination training with developmentally impaired individuals. International Review or Research in Mental Retardation, 14, 135–164.
LUCIANO, M. C. (1988). Un análisis de los procedimientos para la adquisiciön, eliminaciön, mantenimiento y generalizacíon del comportamiento en personas retardadas en su desarrollo [An analysis of the procedures for the acquisition, elimination, maintenance and generalization of behavior in developmentally retarded persons]. In M. C. LUCIANO & J. GIL ROALES-NIETO (Eds.), Análisis e Intervention Conductual en Retraso en el Desarrollo (pp. 51–104). Granada: Servicio de Publicaciones. Universidad de Granada.
LUCIANO, M. C, HERRUZO, J., & BARNES-HOLMES, D. (2001) Generalization of say-do correspondence. The Psychological Record, 51, 111–130.
LYNCH, D, & GREEN, G. (1991). Development and crossmodal transfer of contextual control of emergent stimulus relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56, 139–154.
MEEHAN, E. F., & FIELDS, L. (1995). Contextual control of new equivalence classes. The Psychological Record, 45, 165–182.
PEREZ, L. A. (1994). Transfer of relational stimulus control in conditional discriminations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 61, 487–503.
STEELE, D, & HAYES, S. C. (1991). Stimulus equivalence and arbitrarily applicable relational responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56, 519–555.
STROMER, R., MCILVANE, W. J., & SERNA, R. W. (1993). Complex stimulus control and equivalence. The Psychological Record, 43, 585–598.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gómez, S., Barnes-Holmes, D. & Luciano, M.C. Generalized Break Equivalence II: Contextual Control Over A Generalized Pattern of Stimulus Relations. Psychol Rec 52, 203–220 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395424
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395424