The effects of rules on human behaviour have long been identified as important in the psychological literature. The increasing importance of the dynamics of arbitrarily applicable relational responding (AARR), with regards to rules, has come to be of particular interest within Relational Frame Theory (RFT). One feature of AARR that previous research has suggested may differentially impact persistent rule-following is level of derivation. However, no published research to date has systematically explored this suggestion. Across two experiments, the impact of levels of derivation was examined on persistent rule-following at two stages of relational development: mutual entailment (Exp. 1) and combinatorial entailment (Exp. 2). A Training IRAP was used to establish a mutually entailed relational network in Experiment 1 and a combinatorially entailed network in Experiment 2, and to train these networks to different levels of derivation. This was followed by a contingency switching Match-to-Sample (MTS) task to assess rule persistence. Results from both experiments were generally consistent with the suggestion that lower levels of derivation produce more persistent rule-following. Unexpectedly, however, the findings from Experiment 1 also indicated that persistence was moderated by the type of novel word employed. Variations in results across both experiments and their implications for future research are discussed.

Rule-governed behavior and its role in generating insensitivity to direct contingencies of reinforcement have been implicated in human psychological suffering. In addition, the human capacity to engage in derived relational responding has also been used to explain specific human maladaptive behaviors, such as irrational fears. To date, however, very little research has attempted to integrate research on contingency insensitivity and derived relations. The current work sought to fill this gap. Across two experiments, participants received either a direct rule (Direct Rule Condition) or a rule that involved a novel derived relational response (Derived Rule Condition). Provision of a direct rule resulted in more persistent rule-following in the face of competing contingencies, but only when the opportunity to follow the reinforced rule beforehand was relatively protracted. Furthermore, only in the Direct Rule Condition were there significant correlations between rule-compliance and stress. A post hoc interpretation of the findings is provided.

Rule-governed behavior and derived relational responding have both been identified as important variables in human learning. Recent developments in relational frame theory (RFT) have outlined a number of key variables of potential importance when analyzing the dynamics involved in derived relational responding. Recent research has explored the impact of one of these variables, level of derivation, on persistent rule-following and implicated another, coherence, as possibly important. However, no research to date has examined the impact of coherence on persistent rule-following directly. Across two experiments, coherence was manipulated through the systematic use of performance feedback, and its impact was examined on persistent rule-following. A training procedure based on the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) was used to establish novel combinatorially entailed relations that manipulated the feedback provided on the trained relations (A-B and B-C) in Experiment 1, and on the untrained, derived relations (A-C) in Experiment 2. One of these relations was then inserted into the rule for responding on a subsequent contingency-switching match-to-sample (MTS) task to assess rule persistence. While no significant differences were found in Experiment 1, the provision or non-provision of feedback had a significant differential impact on rule-persistence in Experiment 2. Specifically, participants in the Feedback group resurged back to the original rule for significantly more responses after demonstrating contingencysensitive responding than did the No Feedback group, after the contingency reversal. The results highlight the subtle complexities that appear to be involved in persistent rule-following in the face of reversed reinforcement contingencies.

No abstract

A recent systematic review has highlighted that the terms pliance, tracking, and augmenting have rarely been used as the basis for conducting systematic experimental-analytic research since their conception in 1982, despite their theoretical centrality to the study of rulegoverned behavior and their presumed impact on psychological suffering. Given that some time has passed since the review article, it may be useful to reflect again upon their place within the literature on the experimental analysis of human behavior, and relational frame theory in particular. As such, the current article constitutes a "position piece" rather than another formal systematic review. In reviewing (informally) the literature since the systematic review, the recent emergence of psychometric research involving these concepts could be seen as reinforcing the original conclusions, in that researchers are recognizing that pliance, tracking and augmenting may be of limited value in the experimental analysis of human behavior. Instead, the concept of rule-governed behavior itself, as well as the subcategories of pliance, tracking and augmenting, should be considered middle-level terms, which lack the relative precision of more technical terms within the literature on relational frame theory.