Enhancement of equivalence class formation by pretraining discriminative functions

Abstract

The present experiment showed that a simple discriminative function acquired by an abstract stimulus through simultaneous and/or successive discrimination training enhanced the formation of an equivalence class of which that stimulus was a member. College students attempted to form three equivalence classes composed of three nodes and five members (A→B→C→D→E), using the simultaneous protocol. In the PIC group, the C stimuli were pictures and the A, B, D, and E stimuli were abstract shapes. In the ABS group, all of the stimuli were abstract shapes. In the SIM + SUCC (simultaneous and successive) group, simple discriminations were formed with the C stimuli through both simultaneous and successive discrimination training before class formation. Finally, in the SIM-only and SUCC-only groups, prior to class formation, simple discriminations were established for the C stimuli with a simultaneous procedure and a successive procedure, respectively. Equivalence classes were formed by 80% and 70% of the participants in the PIC and SIM + SUCC groups respectively, by 30% in the SUCC-only group, and by 10% apiece in the ABS and SIM-only groups. Thus, pretraining of combined simultaneous and successive discriminations enhanced class formation, as did the inclusion of a meaningful stimulus in a class. The isolated effect of forming successive discriminations was more influential than that of forming simultaneous discriminations. The establishment of both discriminations together produced an enhancement greater than the sum of the two procedures alone. Finally, a sorting test documented the maintenance of the classes formed during the simultaneous protocol. These results also provide a stimulus control-function account of the class-enhancing effects of meaningful stimuli.

On the effectiveness of including meaningful pictures in the formation of equivalence classes

“…Also, for participants who did not form equivalence classes, the proportion of probe trials that were consistent with experimenter‐defined classes was higher for all picture groups compared to the abstract group in all three experiments. These findings replicate those previously reported by Arntzen et al (); Arntzen, Nartey et al (2015); Fields et al (); Mensah & Arntzen (); and Nartey et al (, ). We did not find any differences in yields when comparing colorful pictorial stimuli and black‐and‐white pictorial stimuli (Experiment 1) or the inclusion and exclusion of test trials including meaningful pictures as C stimuli (Experiment 2).…”

“…Some of the papers in the line of the research mentioned above have reported delayed emergence. A typical finding is that a portion of participants shows immediate emergence (pass both test halves on the equivalence test) and another typically smaller portion responds in accordance with equivalence in the second half (Arntzen & Nartey, 2018;Arntzen et al, 2014;Arntzen, Nartey, et al, 2015;Arntzen et al, 2018a;Nartey et al, 2014Nartey et al, , 2015aNartey et al, , 2015b In sum, the nine papers showed delayed emergence of equivalence classes in 6.9%-23.1% of the participants. Also, one article reported delayed emergence as a function of nodes (Fields et al, 2012).…”

“…A recent line of research has explored the effects of including familiar color pictures as one of the stimuli in each potential class to model or mimic meaningfulness in a laboratory setting (Arntzen & Nartey, ; Arntzen, Nartey, & Fields, , , , ; Fields, Arntzen, Nartey, & Eilifsen, ; Mensah & Arntzen, ; Nartey, Arntzen, & Fields, , , ; Nedelcu, Fields, & Arntzen, ; Travis, Fields, & Arntzen, ; see also an overview in Fields & Arntzen, ). The common procedure in these experiments is to train adult participants on 12 conditional discriminations using a linear series (LS) training structure (A➔B➔C➔D➔E) and test for the formation of three 5‐member equivalence classes.…”

Effects of Meaningful Stimuli Contained in Different Numbers of Classes on Equivalence Class Formation

“…In this experiment, the number of trials to criterion or speed of acquisition seem to be a good predictor of forming equivalence classes or not. This finding is in accordance with previous studies (e.g., Nartey et al, 2015a). Hence, more studies need to confirm this finding.…”

Training order and structural location of meaningful stimuli: Effects on equivalence class formation

“…Lower and equal yields were produced when the meaningful stimulus was used as the B or the D member in the class, and a very low percentage of participants formed classes when the meaningful stimulus was the E member of the class. Previously, separate articles have reported the enhancement effects produced by some of these conditions: meaningful stimuli as C stimuli Fields et al, 2012;Nartey et al, 2015;Travis et al, 2014) and meaningful stimuli as A and E stimuli . In the present study, we explored the effects of all of the conditions in a single experiment and replicated the findings obtained in the prior experiments.…”