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

This study explored the role of baseline reject control on transitivity responding. In Experiment 1, participants learned to respond to a baseline of arbitrary AB and AC conditional relations, and then they were exposed to transitivity‐like BC and CB trials in which the correct comparison stimulus was replaced by a novel stimulus (D). Five of 10 participants selected stimulus D, but only 1 showed expansion of the baseline stimulus classes to include the D stimuli. In Experiment 2, the emergence of symmetry and transitivity from baseline relations was assessed before participants were exposed to the transitivity‐like trials. Six of 8 participants who showed emergence of equivalence relations selected the D stimuli on transitivity‐like trials and provided evidence that baseline classes expanded to include these stimuli. In Experiment 3, these 6 participants selected novel stimuli (E) in additional transitivity‐like trials, and all showed that the E stimuli had become members of the previously established classes, which now comprised 5 members. A route for the emergence of transitivity by way of the transfer of baseline between‐classes reject control is discussed.

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Transfer of baseline reject control to transitivity trials and its effect on equivalence class formation

Plazas

2019

“…Note that the third comparison stimuli (e.g., B3) were never correct options and did not belong to any particular class. Three comparison stimuli were used to discourage the establishment of reject control (e.g., Perez, Tomanari et al, 2015; Sidman & Tailby, 1982).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Equivalence relations and the contextual control of multiple derived stimulus functions

Pérez¹,

Azevedo

Gomes³

et al. 2020

Self Cite

Contextual control is a key aspect in equivalence research to support the claim that stimuli may have multiple functions or symbols may have multiple meanings. The present study investigated the contextual control of multiple derived stimulus functions in two experiments. In Experiment 1, equivalence classes were formed and one stimulus set from each class was used to establish two different functions: one via positive reinforcement (key‐pressing) and another via negative reinforcement (button clicking), both under contextual control of two different background colors. Later, other stimuli from the equivalence class were presented on those background colors and contextual control of multiple derived stimulus functions was assessed. Experiment 2 added a third background in which no programmed response was reinforced, that is, responses were extinguished. Transfer‐of‐function tests revealed contextual control of three different functions, including derived extinction. Implications for equivalence relations as a behavior‐analytical model of symbolic functioning are discussed.

“…Although there is evidence that equivalence classes may be established via simple discrimination training (e.g., Canovas et al, 2015;Dickins, 2015), most equivalence studies have used conditional discrimination preparations with typically developing adults (MTS; e.g., Fields, Arntzen, Nartey, & Eilifsen, 2012;Mackay, Wilkinson, Farrell, & Serna, 2011;Perez, Tomanari, & Vaidya, 2015;Pilgrim & Galizio, 1995). When participants include young children, results tend to be more variable (e.g., Pilgrim, Click, & Galizio, 2011;Pilgrim, Jackson, & Galizio, 2000).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Simple discrimination training with differential responses to establish functional and equivalence classes with preschool children

Canovas

Debert

Miguel

2018

The present study assessed whether simple discrimination training with differential responses would produce functional and equivalence classes with preschool children. In Experiment 1, we exposed 10 children to simple successive discrimination training in which they had to press different buttons (selection‐based responses). Response 1 (R1) was reinforced only in the presence of A1, B1, or C1, and Response 2 (R2) was reinforced only in the presence of A2, B2, or C2. We assessed the formation of functional classes by training new selection responses in the presence of one member of each class (A1‐R3, A2‐R4) and testing to see if these responses would occur in the presence of other members. Eight children responded consistently with functional class formation. Four of these eight children also responded consistently with the formation of equivalence classes. Experiment 2 investigated whether differential motor responses (i.e., gestures) would improve equivalence class yields. Three of six children showed both functional and equivalence class formation. In general, the results indicate that the simple discrimination procedure with differential responses yielded functional and equivalence class formation.