The Analysis of Verbal Behavior

, Volume 32, Issue 2, pp 171–193 | Cite as

An Evaluation of Two Stimulus Equivalence Training Sequences on the Emergence of Novel Intraverbals

  • Brittany Zaring-Hinkle
  • Charlotte Lynn Carp
  • Tracy L. Lepper
Special Section: The Intraverbal Relation

Abstract

Researchers have begun to investigate the emergence of novel intraverbals using equivalence-based instruction (EBI) in typically developing children (Carp & Petursdottir, 2012; Pérez-González, Herszlikowicz, & Williams, 2008). We sought to replicate and extend the previous research by investigating two stimulus equivalence training sequences (e.g., linear series—LS and one to many—OTM) in the emergence of novel intraverbals in a two-part study with college students. Experiment 1 was designed to partially replicate the previous research by training intraverbals using an LS arrangement and then testing for the emergence of novel intraverbals. Novel intraverbals did not emerge after baseline training alone for the majority of participants. Experiment 2 investigated whether a different training sequence (i.e., OTM) would result in the emergence of novel intraverbals. Novel intraverbals did emerge following baseline training alone for the majority of participants. Overall, these results suggest that training intraverbals in an OTM training sequence may establish conditional discriminations during training, which may make it a more advantageous sequence, in that following training, more novel intraverbals emerge.

Keywords

College students Conditional discriminations Emergence Inferential statistics Intraverbals Linear series Stimulus equivalence 

References

  1. Albright, L., Reeve, K. F., Reeve, S. A., & Kisamore, A. N. (2015). Teaching statistical variability with equivalence-based instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48, 883–894. doi:10.1002/jaba.249.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Arntzen, E. (2012). Training and testing parameters in formation of stimulus equivalence: methodological issues. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 13, 123–135.Google Scholar
  3. Arntzen, E., & Holth, P. (2000). Differential probabilities of equivalence outcome in individual subjects as a function of training structure. The Psychological Record, 50, 603–628.Google Scholar
  4. Carp, C. L., & Petursdottir, A. I. (2012). Effects of two training conditions on the emergence novel intraverbals: an extension of Pérez-González et al. (2008). The Psychological Record, 62, 187–206.Google Scholar
  5. Critchfield, T. S., & Fienup, D. M. (2010). Using stimulus equivalence technology to teach statistical inference in a group setting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 763–768. doi:10.1901/jaba.2010.43-763.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Fields, L., Travis, R., Roy, D., Yadlovker, E., Aguiar-Rocha, L., & Sturmey, P. (2009). Equivalence class formation: a method for teaching statistical interactions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 575–593. doi:10.1901/jaba.2009.42-575.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Fienup, D. M., & Critchfield, T. S. (2010). Efficiently establishing concepts of inferential statistics and hypothesis decision making through contextually controlled equivalence classes. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 437–462. doi:10.1901/jaba.2010.43-437.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Fienup, D. M., & Critchfield, T. S. (2011). Transportability of equivalence based programmed instruction: efficacy and efficiency in a college classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44, 435–450. doi:10.1901/jaba.2011.44-435.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Fienup, D. M., Covey, D. P., & Critchfield, T. S. (2010). Teaching brain-behavior relations economically with stimulus equivalence technology. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 19–33. doi:10.1901/jaba.2010.43-763.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performances in science, engineering, and mathematics. PNAS, 111, 8410–8415. doi:10.1073/pnas.1319030111.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (Eds.) (2001). Relational frame theory: a post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  12. 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. doi:10.1901/jeab.1991.56-139.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Hove, O. (2003). Differential probability of equivalence class formation following a one-to-many versus a many-to-one training structure. The Psychological Record, 53, 617–634.Google Scholar
  14. Lovett, S., Rehfeldt, R. A., Garcia, Y., & Dunning, J. (2011). Comparison of stimulus equivalence protocol and traditional lecture for teaching single-subject designs. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44, 819–833. doi:10.1901/jaba.2011.44-819.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Ninness, C., Rumph, R., McCuller, G., Harrison, C., Ford, A. M., & Ninness, S. K. (2005). A functional analytic approach to computer-interactive mathematics. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38, 1–22. doi:10.1901/jaba.2005.2-04.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Ninness, C., Barnes-Holmes, D., Rumph, R., McCuller, G., Ford, A. M., Payne, R., Ninness, S. K., Smith, R. J., Ward, T. A., & Elliott, M. P. (2006). Transformations of mathematical and stimulus functions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39, 299–321. doi:10.1901/jaba.2006.139-05.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Ninness, C., Dixon, M., Barnes-Holmes, D., Rehfeldt, R. A., Rumph, R., McCuller, G., Holland, J., Smith, R., Ninness, S. K., & McGinty, J. (2009). Constructing and deriving reciprocal trigonometric relations: a functional analytic approach. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 191–208. doi:10.1901/jaba.2009.42-191.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Pérez-González, L. A., & Williams, G. (2002). Multicomponent procedure to teach conditional discriminations to children with autism. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 107, 293–301. doi:10.1352/0895-8017.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Pérez-González, L. A., Garcia-Asenjo, L., Williams, G., & Carnerero, J. J. (2007). Emergence of intraverbal antonyms in children with pervasive developmental disorder. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 40, 697–703. doi:10.1901/jaba.2007.697-701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pérez-González, L. A., Herszlikowicz, K., & Williams, G. (2008). Stimulus relations analysis and the emergence of novel intraverbals. The Psychological Record, 58, 95–129.Google Scholar
  21. Petursdottir, A. I., Carr, J. E., Lechago, S. A., & Almason, S. M. (2008). An evaluation of intraverbal training and listener training for teaching categorization skills. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 41, 53–68. doi:10.1901/jaba.2008.41-53.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Saunders, R. R., & Green, G. (1999). A discrimination analysis of training-structure effects on stimulus equivalence outcomes. Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 72, 117–137. doi:10.1901/jeab.1999.72-117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Saunders, R. R., & McEntee, J. E. (2004). Increasing the probability of stimulus equivalence with adults with mild mental retardation. The Psychological Record, 54, 423–435.Google Scholar
  24. 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. doi:10.1901/jeab.1989.52-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Saunders, K. J., & Spradlin, J. E. (1990). Conditional discrimination in mentally retarded adults: the development of generalized skills. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 54, 239–250. doi:10.1901/jeab.1990.54-239.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Saunders, K. J., & Spradlin, J. E. (1993). Conditional discrimination in mentally retarded subjects: programming acquisition and learning set. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 60, 571–585. doi:10.1901/jeab.1993.60-571.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 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. doi:10.1901/jeab.1988.49-95.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Saunders, R. R., Chaney, L., & Marquis, J. G. (2005). Equivalence class establishment with two-, three-, and four-choice matching to sample by senior citizens. The Psychological Record, 55, 539–559.Google Scholar
  29. Schlinger, H. D. (2008). Listening is behaving verbally. The Behavior Analyst, 31, 145–161.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Sidman, M. (1994). Equivalence relations and behavior: a research story. Boston, MA: Authors Cooperative.Google Scholar
  31. Sidman, M. (2000). Equivalence relations and the reinforcement contingency. Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74, 127–146. doi:10.1901/jeab.2000.74-127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sidman, M., & Tailby, W. (1982). Conditional discrimination vs. matching to sample: an expansion of the testing paradigm. Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 5–22. doi:10.1901/jeab.1982.37-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York, NY: Apple-Century-Crofts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Spradlin, J. R., Cotter, V. W., & Baxley, N. (1973). Establishing a conditional discrimination without direct training: a study of transfer with retarded adolescents. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 77, 556–566.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Toussaint, K. A., & Tiger, J. H. (2010). Teaching early braille literacy skills within a stimulus equivalence paradigm to children with degenerative visual impairments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 181–194. doi:10.1901/jaba.2010.43-181.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Walker, B. D., & Rehfeldt, R. A. (2010). Using the stimulus equivalence paradigm to teach course material in an undergraduate rehabilitation course. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43, 615–633. doi:10.1901/jaba.2010.43-615.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Walker, B. D., & Rehfeldt, R. A. (2012). An evaluation of the stimulus equivalence paradigm to teach single-subject design to distance education students via blackboard. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45, 329–344. doi:10.1901/jaba.2012.45-329.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brittany Zaring-Hinkle
    • 1
  • Charlotte Lynn Carp
    • 1
  • Tracy L. Lepper
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyMcNeese State UniversityLake CharlesUSA

Personalised recommendations