Controles Por Seleção E Rejeição Em Treinos De Discriminação Condicional E Testes De Equivalência

Perez, Willian Ferreira; Tomanari, Gerson Yukio

doi:10.18542/rebac.v4i2.849

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Performances during equivalence tests were classified in accordance with three different patterns used to infer the establishment of reject or select control during training (Carrigan & Sidman, 1992;Johnson & Sidman, 1993;Perez & Tomanari, 2008. A reject-control pattern was defined whenever participants emitted no more than one correct response on transitivity (AC), equivalence (CA), and reflexivity (AA, BB and CC) tests, and also emitted at least 15 correct responses in the symmetry (BA and CB) tests (15/16 ¼ 93% of correct responses in accordance with the programmed equivalence class).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In summary, Carrigan and Sidman's (1992) analysis suggests that participants should perform with high accuracy on all components of the equivalence test if baseline conditional discriminations are established as sample/Sþ relations (hereafter, select-control pattern). However, participants should perform with low accuracy on tests of reflexivity, transitivity, and equivalence but perform with high accuracy on tests of symmetry if all conditional relations are established as sample/S-relations (hereafter, reject-control pattern; see Carrigan & Sidman, 1992;Johnson & Sidman, 1993;Perez & Tomanari, 2008. Carrigan and Sidman's (1992) analysis set the occasion for studies investigating the effects of select and reject relations upon equivalence test outcomes (de Rose, Hidalgo, & Vasconcellos, 2013;Johnson & Sidman, 1993).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of select and reject control on equivalence class formation and transfer of function

Pérez

Tomanari

Vaidya

2015

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study used a single-subject design to evaluate the effects of select or reject control on equivalence class formation and transfer of function. Adults were exposed to a matching-to-sample task with observing requirements (MTS-OR) in order to bias the establishment of sample/S+ (select) or sample/S- (reject) relations. In Experiment 1, four sets of baseline conditional relations were taught-two under reject control (A1B2C1, A2B1C2) and two under select control (D1E1F1, D2E2F2). Participants were tested for transitivity, symmetry, equivalence and reflexivity. They also learned a simple discrimination involving one of the stimuli from the equivalence classes and were tested for the transfer of the discriminative function. In general, participants performed with high accuracy on all equivalence-related probes as well as the transfer of function probes under select control. Under reject control, participants had high scores only on the symmetry test; transfer of function was attributed to stimuli programmed as S-. In Experiment 2, the equivalence class under reject control was expanded to four members (A1B2C1D2; A2B1C2D1). Participants had high scores only on symmetry and on transitivity and equivalence tests involving two nodes. Transfer of function was extended to the programmed S- added to each class. Results from both experiments suggest that select and reject controls might differently affect the formation of equivalence classes and the transfer of stimulus functions.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of select and reject control on equivalence class formation and transfer of function

Pérez

Tomanari

Vaidya

2015

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A reject control, in contrast, occurs when the sample relates to S-and the established behavioral component is "do not choose" or "reject" (e.g., if A1, then reject B2). Perez and Tomanari (2008) have identified three main experimental variations used to study the occurrence of selection and rejection controlling relationships: (i) procedures that add new stimuli to replace one of the comparison stimuli (e.g., Cumming and Berryman 1965;Dixon and Dixon 1978;Goulart et al 2005;McIlvane et al 1987;Stromer and Osborne 1982); (ii) procedures that add masks to replace one of the comparison stimuli (e.g., McIlvane et al 1987;Wilkinson and McIlvane 1997);and (iii) procedures that use different amounts of S+ and S-to establish the two types of stimulus control (e.g., Johnson and Sidman 1993;Magnusson 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of eye movement in matching-to-sample tasks

Huziwara

Souza

Tomanari

2016

Psicol. Refl. Crít.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study evaluated whether during a matching-to-sample procedure (MTS), the time spent observing stimuli is related to the establishment of selection or rejection controlling relationships in human participants. It also evaluated whether different response topographies (i.e., participants using the keyboard or mouse) would influence the duration of eye fixations. Ten college students participated. The procedure established conditional relationships among six sets of abstract stimuli. Five participants selected the comparison stimuli using a computer mouse and five used a keyboard. An eye-scan device recorded eye movements throughout the training procedure. After participants completed training, probes verified whether the conditional relationships learned were controlled by selection (e.g., if A1, select B1), by rejection (e.g., if A1, reject B2), or both. All participants displayed a similar pattern of stimuli observation. Time spent observing the sample stimulus (e.g., A1) was longer than observing the comparison stimuli (e.g., B1 and B2). Time spent observing S+ (positive stimuli; e.g., B1) was longer than observing S-(negative stimuli; e.g., B2). Duration of eye fixation was not related to selection or rejection controlling relationships, but different response topographies appeared to modulate the amount of time spent observing stimuli.

show abstract

“…The S+ and the S-were simultaneously presented in Type I, and the correct response was to touch the S+. Thus, the responses could be controlled only by the aspects of the S+ and, in an opposite way, could be controlled only by the aspects of the S- (Carrigan & Sidman, 1992;Goulart et al, 2005;Johnson & Sidman, 1993;Perez & Tomanari, 2008, 2013Sidman, 1987Sidman, , 1994), but it was not possible to ensure the relations established in those trial types. On trials in Type II, the S+ and a white square were presented, and the correct response was also to touch S+.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Analyzing the Stimulus Control Acquisition in Simple Discrimination Tasks through Eye Movement

Huziwara¹,

Silva²,

Pérez³

et al. 2015

Psicol. Reflex. Crit.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to investigate whether simultaneous or successive presentation of stimuli is related to the duration of eye fi xation (i.e., the time spent gazing a specifi c stimulus), this study described the eye movements of young adults in simultaneous and successive simple discrimination tasks. Using 12 landscape scenes as visual stimuli, three participants were exposed to a simple discrimination training with simultaneously presented stimuli (Si Procedure) and then to a second simple discrimination training with successively presented stimuli (Su Procedure). Another three participants were exposed to the Procedure in the opposite order. In both cases, the learning criterion was that at least 90% of the responses should be correct in one block. Eye movements were recorded during the whole experiment. Participants achieved the learning criteria in both procedures. Beyond that, eye fi xation time in the Su Procedure was higher than in the Si Procedure, regardless of the training sequence. Taken together with previous results in different experiments, our fi ndings suggest that the duration of eye fi xation plays a central role in the establishment of different stimulus control topographies. Keywords: Eye movements, eye fi xation time, simultaneous discrimination, successive discrimination, young adults. ResumoCom o objetivo de investigar se a apresentação simultânea ou sucessiva de estímulos estaria relacionada com a duração da fi xação do olhar (i.e., o tempo gasto fi xando um estímulo específi co), este estudo descreveu os movimentos dos olhos de adultos em tarefas de discriminação simples simultâneas e sucessivas. Utilizando 12 cenas de paisagens como estímulos visuais, três participantes foram expostos a um treino de discriminação simples com estímulos apresentados simultaneamente (Procedimento Si) e, em seguida, a um segundo treino de discriminação simples com estímulos apresentados sucessivamente (Procedimento Su). Outros três participantes foram expostos ao Procedimento em ordem inversa. Em ambos os casos, uma concentração mínima de 90% das respostas ao estímulo correto, em um mesmo bloco, defi nia a aquisição da discriminação. Os movimentos dos olhos foram registrados durante todo o experimento. Participantes atingiram os critérios de aquisição da discriminação em ambos os procedimentos. Além disso, o tempo de fi xação do olhar no Procedimento Su foi maior do que no Procedimento Si, independentemente da sequência de treino. Considerados em conjunto com resultados prévios em diferentes experimentos, nossos dados sugerem que a duração da fi xação do olhar exerce um papel central no estabelecimento de diferentes topografi as de controle de estímulos. Palavras-chave: Movimentos dos olhos, tempo de fi xação dos olhos, discriminação simultânea, discriminação sucessiva, jovens adultos.By analyzing simple, everyday events, it is possible to verify that some aspects of the environment infl uence the probability of occurrence of behaviors. A red traffi c light, a road sign, or an offi cer's signal are examples...

show abstract

Controles Por Seleção E Rejeição Em Treinos De Discriminação Condicional E Testes De Equivalência

Cited by 7 publications

References 20 publications

Effects of select and reject control on equivalence class formation and transfer of function

Effects of select and reject control on equivalence class formation and transfer of function

Patterns of eye movement in matching-to-sample tasks

Analyzing the Stimulus Control Acquisition in Simple Discrimination Tasks through Eye Movement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About