Abstract
This study examined the effects of outcome-specific consequences on the formation of stimulus equivalence classes. Five-year-old children learned conditional discriminations with four sets of visual stimuli (Sets A-D) using matching to sample. In Experiment 1, eight children received AA, BB, CC, and DD identity-matching and AB and BC arbitrary-matching training. Throughout the training, correct selections of A1, B1, C1, and D1, for example, produced a red bead (R1), and correct selections of A2, B2, C2, and D2 produced a blue bead (R2). Results on class-formation probes demonstrated the formation of two ABC stimulus equivalence classes for seven subjects. Subsequent test probes involving D stimuli demonstrated that for six subjects the ABC stimulus classes were expanded with D1 and D2 based on relations with R1 and R2, respectively. In Experiment 2, eight other subjects received the same identity-matching training as in Experiment 1 but were refrained from arbitrary-matching training. Test probes documented the formation of two ABCD stimulus classes for six subjects. Subsequent tests involving visual representations of R1 and R2 demonstrated that these six subjects related R1 and R2 to the corresponding A, B, C, and D stimuli. It was concluded that stimulus equivalence classes may be not only expanded but also established via outcome-specific consequences and that R1 and R2 stimuli may acquire the same status as their respective class members.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
BRODIGAN, D. A., & PETERSON, G. B. (1976). The-choice conditional discrimination performance of pigeons as a function of reward expectancy, pre-choice delay, and domesticity. Animal Learning and Behavior, 4, 121–124.
CUMMING, W. W., & BERRYMAN, R. (1965). The complex discriminated operant: Studies of matching-to-sample and related problems. In D.I. Mostofsky (Ed.), Stimulus generalization (pp. 284–330). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
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.
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.
DUBE, W. V., MCLLVANE, W. J., MAGUIRE, R. W., MACKAY, H. A., & STODDARD, L. T. (1989) Stimulus class formation and stimulus-reinforcer relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 65–76
DUGDALE, N., & LOWE, C. F. (1990). Naming and stimulus equivalence. In D. Blackman & H. Lejeune (Eds.), Behavior analysis in theory and practice: Contributions and controversies (pp. 115–138). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
EDWARDS, C. A., JAGIELO, J. A., ZENTALL, T. R., & HOGAN, D. E. (1982). Acquired equivalence and distinctiveness in matching to sample by pigeons: Mediation by reinforcer-specific expectancies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Process, 8, 244–259.
GOLDIAMOND, I. (1966). Perception, language, and conceptualization rules. In Kleinmuntz (Ed.), Problem solving (pp.183–224). New York: John Wiley.
HONEY, R. C., & HALL, G. (1989). Acquired equivalence and distinctiveness of cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 15, 338–346.
HONEY, R. C., & HALL, G. (1991). Acquired equivalence and distinctiveness of cues using a sensory-preconditioning procedure. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 43.(2), 121–135.
HONIG, W. K., MATHESON, W. R, & DODD, P. W. D. (1984). Outcome expectancies as mediators for discriminative responding. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 38(2), 196–217.
LAZAR, R. M., DAVIS-LANG, D., & SANCHEZ, L. (1984). The formation of visual stimulus equivalences in children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 41, 251–266.
LITT, M. D., & SCHREIBMAN, L. (1981). Stimulus-specific reinforcement in the acquisition of receptive labels by autistic children. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 1, 171–186.
MCILVANE, W. J., DUBE, W. V., KLEDARAS, J. B., DE ROSE, J. C., & STODDARD, L. T. (1992). Stimulus-reinforcer relations and conditional discrimination. In S. C. Hayes & L. J. Hayes (Eds.), Understanding verbal relations (pp. 43–67). Reno, NV: Context Press.
PETERSON, G. B. (1984). How expectancies guide behavior. In H. L. Roitblat, T. G. Bever, & H. S. Terrace (Eds.), Animal cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
PETERSON, G. B., & TRAPOLD, M. A. (1980). Effects of altering outcome expectancies on pigeons’ delayed conditional discrimination performance. Learning and Motivation, 11, 267–288.
SANTI, A. (1989). Differential outcome expectancies and directed forgetting effects in pigeons. Animal Learning and Behavior, 17, 249–354.
SANTI, A., & ROBERTS, W. A. (1985). Reinforcement expectancy and trial spacing effects in delayed matching-to-sample by pigeons. Animal Learning and Behavior, 13, 274–284.
SAUNDERS, R. R., & SAILOR, W. (1979). A comparison of three strategies of reinforcement on two-choice learning with severely retarded children. Aaesph Review, 4, 323–333.
SAUNDERS, R. R., SAUNDERS, K. J., KIRBY, K. C., & SPRADLIN, J. E. (1988). The merger and development of equivalence classes by unreinforced conditional selection of comparison stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 50, 145–162.
SAUNDERS, R. R., WÄCHTER, 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.
SHEPP, B. E. (1962). Some cue properties of anticipated rewards in discrimination learning of retardates. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 55, 856–859.
SIDMAN, M. (1986). Functional analysis of emergent verbal classes. In T. Thompson & M. D. Zeiler (Eds.), Analysis and integration of behavioral units (pp. 213–245). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
SIDMAN, M. (1992). Equivalence relations: Some basic considerations. In S. C. Hayes & L. J. Hayes (Eds.), Understanding verbal relations (pp. 15–27). Reno, NV: Context Press.
SIDMAN, M., KIRK, B., & WILLSON-MORRIS, M. (1985). Six-member stimulus classes generated by conditional-discrimination procedures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 43, 21–42.
SIDMAN, M., RAUZIN, R., LAZAR, R., CUNNINGHAM, S., TAILBY, W., & CARRIGAN, P. (1982). A search for symmetry in the conditional discriminations of rhesus monkeys, baboons, and children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 23–44.
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.
SIDMAN, M., WILLSON-MORRIS, M., & KIRK B. (1986). Matching-to-sample procedures and the development of equivalence relations: The role of naming. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 6, 1–19.
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.
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.
STODDARD, L. T., & MCILVANE, W. J. (1986). Stimulus control research and developmentally disabled individuals. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 6, 155–178.
STROMER, R., & OSBORNE, J. G. (1982). Control of adolescents’ arbitrary matching-to-sample by positive and negative stimulus relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 329–348.
STROMER, R., & STROMER, J. B. (1990a). The formation of stimulus classes in matching to complex samples. The Psychological Record, 40, 51–66.
STROMER, R., & STROMER, J. B. (1990b). Matching to complex samples: Further study of arbitrary stimulus classes. The Psychological Record, 40, 505–516.
WETHERBY, B., KARLAN, G. R., & SPRADLIN, J. E. (1983). The development of derived stimulus relations through training in arbitrary-matching sequences. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 40, 69–78.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
The author expresses appreciation to The Eerste Leidse Schoolvereniging for their participation in the study, and Mrs. Sonia Markus and Mrs. Naomi Hylkema for their assistance in conducting the experiments.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schenk, J.J. Emergent Relations of Equivalence Generated by Outcome-Specific Consequences in Conditional Discrimination. Psychol Rec 44, 537–558 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395143
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395143