Acquisition, Generalization, and Contextual Control of Taxonomic and Thematic Relational Responding

Abstract

In three experiments, college students performed either 2-or 3-comparison conditional discriminations (arbitrary matching to sample) that utilized 64 different configurations composed of drawings. Within each configuration , one comparison related to the sample taxonomically, one related thematically, and, where there was a third comparison, it did not relate to the sample. In training phases, subjects received positive verbal feedback for selections of either the taxonomic or thematic comparisons. Between training phases, subjects responded to novel configurations similar to those of training phases on which they received no feedback for their selections. For some subjects, one cycle through all the phases ended the experiment (Experiment 1); for others, in a second cycle, verbal feedback was reversed to follow selections based on the other relation and all phases were repeated (Experiment 2); and for 1 subject, contextual stimuli indicated which relation would lead to positive verbal feedback for each selection (Experiment 3) . On test phases, the selections of all subjects became increasingly consistent with verbal feedback during training while the contextual stimuli reliably enabled the appropriate relations. These results suggest that human subjects respond relationally on this task, and that such relational responding can be contextually controlled.

Predicting Taxonomic and Thematic Relational Responding

“…As B comparisons were, indeed, rated more perceptually similar to A comparisons than C comparisons, subjects chose B comparisons to match with A in the A(BC) trial type. (Bauer & Mandler, 1989;Osborne & Koppel, 2001;Smiley & Brown, 1979). In the present studies, there was no formal modeling, and with the exception of the presentation of a subsequent trial, there were no systematic outcomes that were a result of responding.…”

“…In one, differential reinforcement oftaxonomic or thematic selections gives the samples an instructional function (i.e., select taxonomic comparisons or select thematic comparisons). Osborne and Koppel (2001) demonstrated such a function. They reinforced college student selections of either taxonomic or thematic relations on a set oftrial types ofthe A(CD) type (with A-C = superordinate taxonomic relations and A-D = thematic relations).…”

“…Osborne and Koppel (2001) did this also in a related experiment using the same task. In this experiment, two additional stimuli (CS1 and CS2) were employed as contextual stimuli.…”

“…Using this task, the data less typically support the age-related hypothesis. Rather, selection of comparison stimuli relates to contextual variables such as reinforcement for one type of selection (Bauer & Mandler, 1989;Osborne & Koppel, 2001), observation of a model differentially selecting comparisons of one kind or another (Smiley & 55 Brown, 1979), receipt of instructions that suggest taxonomic selection (Osborne & Calhoun, 1998;Waxman & Namy, 1997), or control by specific contextual stimuli (Osborne & Koppel, 2001). Moreover, individual subjects exhibit differential frequencies of taxonomic or thematic selections (Dunham & Dunham, 1995: Osborne & Calhoun, 1998.…”

“…As mentioned above, on one level, reinforcement contingencies, modeling, and instructions all provide contexts. On another level, contexts can also be provided by arbitrary stimuli that enable taxonomic or thematic selections on individual configurations (Osborne & Koppel, 2001). Absent all of these contexts there remains only the individual trial configuration and that too appears to provide its own context (Osborne & Calhoun, 1998).…”