Normally capable adults learned two-choice identity matching of three-digit numerals and arbitrary matching of physically dissimilar nonsense syllables. The stimuli were displayed on a computer terminal, and responses consisted of typing on the terminal's keyboard. In Experiment 1, every trial displayed a sample numeral, a comparison numeral, and three equal signs (= = =). The comparison stimulus was to be selected if it was identical with the sample; otherwise the equal sign was to be selected. This "single comparison" method was then used to show that arbitrary matching could be based upon either sample-S+ or sample-S- relations. In Experiment 2, a series of probe trials displayed a novel sample, a comparison stimulus from the arbitrary matching baseline, and = = =. Subjects typically selected = = =; they apparently were excluding the baseline comparison stimulus. Experiments 3 through 5 investigated which variables in training would lead to the selection of baseline comparison stimuli in response to novel samples. Behavior was usually unchanged when baseline training included relating comparison stimuli to as many as four different samples. Punishment contingencies were effective, but performance did not generalize unless those contingencies were applied in relation to more than one baseline comparison stimulus.
Experimenters and teachers use discrimination learning procedures to encourage reliable attending to stimulus differences defined as relevant for their purposes. Put another way, the goal of discrimination training is to establish high-probability stimulus control topographies that are coherent with experimenter or teacher specifications. The present research was conducted to investigate a novel procedure for encouraging stimulus control topography coherence. Participants were 13 adolescents with severe intellectual handicaps. During an initial Condition A, all were exposed to a simultaneous discrimination procedure. Participants could select a form alternating with a black field (S+) or an identical form that did not alternate (S-). Accuracy scores were typically low, and there was little evidence of coherent stimulus control topographies. Subsequently, the procedure was changed. During Condition B, every trial initially presented two identical nonalternating S- forms (Trial State 1). If the participant made no selection for 5 s, one of the forms began to alternate with the black field, and he or she could make the S+/S- discrimination (Trial State 2). Selections during Trial State I prolonged the delay to Trial State 2 until there had been no response for 5 s. During Condition B, S+/S- discrimination accuracy scores improved rapidly and markedly for most participants. Reinstating Condition A often resulted in diminished accuracy scores. This study thus (a) demonstrated a novel procedure for encouraging stimulus control topography coherence and (b) provided support for the interpretation that intermediate accuracy scores may be due to different topographies of stimulus control that co-occur in the same discriminative baseline.
This paper discusses recent methodological approaches and investigations that are aimed at developing reliable behavioral technology for teaching stimulus-stimulus relations to individuals who are minimally verbal and show protracted difficulty in acquiring such relations. The paper has both empirical and theoretical content. The empirical component presents recent data concerning the possibility of generating rapid relational learning in individuals who do not initially show it. The theoretical component (1) considers decades of methodological investigations with this population and (2) suggests a testable hypothesis concerning some individuals exhibit unusual difficulties in learning. Given this background, we suggest a way forward to better understand and perhaps resolve these learning challenges.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.