Abstract
The current study examined the role of relational contextual cues (Crels) versus relational coherence indicators (RCIs) as response options in the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP). Fifty-two university undergraduate participants successfully completed two consecutive IRAPs. Both IRAPs were similar except for the response options employed. The Crels similar and different served as response options for one IRAP with the RCIs true and false as response options for the other. The order in which the two different IRAPs were completed was counterbalanced across participants. Although the two types of response options yielded similar effects for the participants’ first exposures to the IRAPs, differences emerged during the second exposures. In addition, one of the four trial types from the IRAP appeared to be particularly sensitive to the Crel–RCI manipulation and the order in which the two types of IRAP blocks were presented (consistent-first versus inconsistent-first with natural verbal relations). The findings highlight the complex behavioral dynamics that may be involved in IRAP performances and suggest that even seemingly trivial components of the procedure require systematic analysis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Although a formal power analysis was not conducted for the current study, the size of the sample reflected in broad terms some of the recommendations reported in a recent meta-analysis of the predictive validity of IRAP effects in the clinical domain (Vahey, Nicholson, & Barnes-Holmes, 2015). On balance, some of the analyses reported in the current article are underpowered in terms of achieving a .80 criterion, particularly those involved in the three-way interaction. Nevertheless, given the preliminary and exploratory nature of the current research, it seemed wise to consider this novel effect. Furthermore, as noted subsequently in the Discussion section, the effect obtained does appear to connect directly with findings we have reported in another recently published article (Finn, Barnes-Holmes, Hussey, & Graddy, 2016).
References
Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Hussey, I., & Luciano, C. (2016). Relational frame theory: Finding its historical and intellectual roots and reflecting upon its future development. In R. Zettle, S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, & T. Biglan (Eds.), Handbook of contextual behavioral science (pp. 117–128). Chichester, England: Wiley-Blackwell.
Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Stewart, I., & Boles, S. (2010). A sketch of the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) and the relational elaboration and coherence (REC) model. The Psychological Record, 60, 527–542.
Barnes-Holmes, D., Hayden, E., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Stewart, I. (2008). The implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) as a response-time and event-related-potentials methodology for testing natural verbal relations: A preliminary study. The Psychological Record, 58, 497–515.
Cabello, F., Luciano, C., Gomez, I., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2011). Human schedule performance, protocol analysis, and the “silent dog” methodology. The Psychological Record, 54, 405–422.
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.
Finn, M., Barnes-Holmes, D., Hussey, I., & Graddy, J. (2016). Exploring the behavioral dynamics of the implicit relational assessment procedure: The impact of three types of introductory rules. The Psychological Record. doi:10.1007/s40732-016-0173-4.
Golijani-Moghaddam, N., Hart, A., & Dawson, D. L. (2013). The implicit relational assessment procedure: Emerging reliability and validity data. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 2, 105–119. doi:10.1016/j.jcbs.2013.05.002.
Hayes, S. C. (1986). The case of the silent dog—Verbal reports and the analysis of rules: A review of Ericsson and Simon’s protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 45, 351–363.
Hayes, S. C., & Barnes, D. (1997). Analyzing derived stimulus relations requires more than the concept of stimulus class. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 68, 235–244.
Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (Eds.). (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Hughes, S., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2016a). Relational frame theory: The basic account. In R. Zettle, S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, & T. Biglan (Eds.), Handbook of contextual behavioral science (pp. 129–178). Chichester, England: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hughes, S., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2016b). Relational frame theory: Implications for the study of human language and cognition. In R. Zettle, S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, & T. Biglan (Eds.), Handbook of contextual behavioral science (pp. 179–226). Chichester, England: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hughes, S., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Vahey, N. A. (2012). Holding on to our functional roots when exploring new intellectual islands: A voyage through implicit cognition research. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 1, 17–38. doi:10.1016/j.jcbs.2012.09.003.
Kosnes, L., Whelan, R., O’Donovan, A., & McHugh, L. A. (2013). Implicit measurement of positive and negative future thinking as a predictor of depressive symptoms and hopelessness. Consciousness and Cognition, 22, 898–912. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2013.06.001.
Nicholson, E., McCourt, A., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2013). The implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) as a measure of obsessive beliefs in relation to disgust. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 2, 23–30. doi:10.1016/j.jcbs.2013.02.002.
O’Hora, D., Barnes-Holmes, D., Roche, B., & Smeets, P. M. (2004). Derived relational networks and control by novel instructions: A possible model of generative verbal responding. The Psychological Record, 54, 437–460.
Steele, D., & Hayes, S. C. (1991). Stimulus equivalence and arbitrarily applicable relational responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56, 519–555.
Vahey, N. A., Nicholson, E., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2015). A meta-analysis of criterion effects for the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) in the clinical domain. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 48, 59–65. doi:10.1016/j.jbtep.2015.01.004.
Wulfert, E., Dougher, M. J., & Greenway, D. E. (1991). Protocol analysis of the correspondence of verbal behavior and equivalence class formation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56, 489–504.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
Emma Maloney declares that she has no conflict of interest. Dermot Barnes-Holmes declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Authors’ Note
This article was prepared with the support of an Odysseus Group 1 grant awarded to the second author by the Flanders Science Foundation (FWO).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Maloney, E., Barnes-Holmes, D. Exploring the Behavioral Dynamics of the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure: The Role of Relational Contextual Cues Versus Relational Coherence Indicators as Response Options. Psychol Rec 66, 395–403 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-016-0180-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-016-0180-5