Probability of Equivalence Formation: Familiar Stimuli and Training Sequence

Arntzen, Erik

doi:10.1007/bf03395474

Cited by 78 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For two decades, behavior analysts have studied the potential of Naming with respect to how it may or may not facilitate certain emergent categorization (Arntzen, 2004;Clayton & Hayes, 1999;Dugdale & Lowe, 1990;Fields et al, 2003;Guess & Baer, 1973;Hayes, 1989;Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, & Roche, 2001;Horne et al, 2004Horne et al, , 2006Keller & Bucher, 1979;Lee, 1981;Lowe & Beasty, 1987;Miguel & Petursdottir, 2009;Miguel, Petursdottir, Carr, & Michael, 2008;Randell & Remington, 2006;Shusterman & Kastak, 1993;Sidman, 1986Sidman, , 1992Smeets & Striefel, 1976;Stone, Miguel, & Gould, 2006;Stromer & McKay, 1996;Wynn & Smith, 2003;Zentall, Galizio, & Critchfield, 2002). See Miguel and Petursdottir for a comprehensive review of that literature.…”

Section: Naming As An Independent Variablementioning

confidence: 99%

A Rose by Naming: How We May Learn How to Do It

Greer

Longano

2010

Analysis Verbal Behav

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Naming appears to be the source of the explosion in language development and involves the integration of the initially separate listener and speaker responses. This integration has a role in the development of reading, writing, and the following and construction of verbal algorithms that make types of complex human behavior possible. Considerable research has investigated the role of Naming in the emergence of derived relations. Recent research has also investigated the emergence of Naming itself. We describe these experiments and the experiences that function to induce Naming. We also describe evidence about preverbal developmental cusps that are foundational to the emergence of Naming and the evidence on its reinforcement sources. The isolation of the role of the environment in the emergence of Naming identifies stimuli that were said to be missing in accounts that were critical of Skinner's (1957) account of verbal behavior. These arguments purported that the phenomenon was not attributable to learning because of the ''poverty of the stimulus.'' Some of the relevant stimuli now appear to be identified.

show abstract

Section: Naming As An Independent Variablementioning

confidence: 99%

A Rose by Naming: How We May Learn How to Do It

Greer

Longano

2010

Analysis Verbal Behav

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The sensory modality of the stimuli used as class members-for instance, visual (e.g., Fields, Arntzen, Nartey, & Eilifsen, 2012), tactile (e.g., Belanich & Fields, 1999), and gustatory (e.g., Hayes, Tilley, & Hayes, 1988)-has also been shown to influence the formation of equivalence classes. When visual stimuli were used as the class members, they consisted of abstract shapes (e.g., Sidman & Tailby, 1982) or meaningful pictures (e.g., Arntzen, 2004;Fields et al, 2012). In addition, the inclusion of a meaningful stimulus at different temporal points in training influenced the likelihood of equivalence class formation (Arntzen, 2004;Fields et al, 2012;.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When visual stimuli were used as the class members, they consisted of abstract shapes (e.g., Sidman & Tailby, 1982) or meaningful pictures (e.g., Arntzen, 2004;Fields et al, 2012). In addition, the inclusion of a meaningful stimulus at different temporal points in training influenced the likelihood of equivalence class formation (Arntzen, 2004;Fields et al, 2012;. In Nartey et al (2014), participants attempted to form three 3-node, 5-member equivalence classes that consisted of four abstract stimuli and one meaningful stimulus.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present study, equivalence class formation was influenced by the temporal point of inclusion of a meaningful stimulus when baseline relations were serially or sequentially trained, and much less so by the location of the meaningful stimulus in the nodal structure of the class. In Experiment 1, participants attempted to form three 3-node, 5-member classes (A→B→C→D→E) under the simultaneous protocol. After serially training the baseline relations AB, BC, CD, and DE, in that order, the emergence of all emergent relations was tested concurrently. In the A-as-PIC condition, Awas meaningful stimulus and B to E were meaningless stimulus, and 60 % of the participants formed classes. In addition, classes were formed by 40 %, 70 %, 40 %, and 20 % of the participants in the B-as-PIC, C-as-PIC, D-as-PIC, and E-as-PIC groups, respectively. Thus, the likelihood of class formation could have been influenced by the location of a meaningful stimulus in the class structure and/or by its order of introduction during training. In Experiment 2, we controlled for any effect of order of introduction by the concurrent training of all of the baseline relations. Regardless of the location of the meaningful stimulus, 0-20 % of participants formed classes. Thus, the temporal order of introducing a meaningful stimulus was the primary modulator of the class-enhancing property of meaningful stimuli, and not the location of the meaningful stimulus in the class structure.

show abstract

“…When attempts to form classes are made using the simultaneous protocol, which involves first training all baseline relations and then testing all derived relations together with the baseline relations, typically classes are quite unlikely to be formed. On the other hand, the inclusion of a meaningful stimulus in a set of meaningless stimuli enhances the likelihood of class formation (Arntzen, 2004;Arntzen & Lian, 2010;Fields, Arntzen, Nartey, & Eilifsen, 2012;Nartey, Arntzen, & Fields, 2014), whether the meaningful stimulus was used as a node (Arntzen & Lian, 2010;Fields et al, 2012) or a single stimulus (Arntzen, 2004;Nartey et al, 2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhancement of equivalence class formation by pretraining discriminative functions

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Probability of Equivalence Formation: Familiar Stimuli and Training Sequence

Cited by 78 publications

References 48 publications

A Rose by Naming: How We May Learn How to Do It

A Rose by Naming: How We May Learn How to Do It

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

Enhancement of equivalence class formation by pretraining discriminative functions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About