Relational frame theory 20 years on: The Odysseus voyage and beyond

Abstract

The seminal text on relational frame theory (RFT) was published 20 years ago and purported to offer a single overarching behavior-analytic account of human language and cognition. In the years thereafter, an increasing number of empirical and conceptual articles, book chapters in edited volumes, and whole volumes devoted to the account emerged. In recent years, RFT has experienced a period of intense empirical and conceptual development, facilitated in part by a research grant awarded by the Flanders Science Foundation, under its Odysseus program. This research program aimed to advance and extend the RFT account beyond the rendition presented in the seminal Hayes et al. ( 2001) volume. The current article aims to provide an overview of this research program, the empirical work and concepts it gave rise to, and their implications for an RFT account of human symbolic language and cognition. Overall, therefore, the article provides an account of relatively recent developments in RFT that extend beyond the 2001 volume and thus will, we hope, inform future research and critiques of the theory going forward.

Relating relational networks: An initial experimental analysis

“…In closing, we argue that the complexity of the relational responding observed in the current study supports the call for a more field‐like analysis of complex relational responding (Barnes‐Holmes et al, 2020, 2021; Barnes‐Holmes & Harte, 2022). Recent studies that have attempted to develop RFT analyses of performances produced on tasks that require rapid and accurate responding in accordance with relatively simple relational networks have highlighted the need to focus on the complex interactions among the different functional properties of that network (see Barnes‐Holmes & Harte, 2022, for a recent summary of this work).…”

“…Researchers in RFT have recently offered what they describe as a hyperdimensional, multilevel framework for analyzing the dynamics of derived relational responding (see Barnes‐Holmes et al, 2017, 2020; Barnes‐Holmes & Harte, 2022). According to this framework, relational responding may be conceptualized as developing in a broad sense from (a) mutual entailment to (b) simple networks involved in frames to (c) more complex networks involved in rules and instructions to (d) the relating of relations involved in analogical reasoning, and finally to (e) relating relational networks, which is typically involved in complex problem solving.…”

Computational models of stimulus equivalence: An intersection for the study of symbolic behavior

“…Consider for example that an arbitrary stimulus relation can be established under different kinds of contextual control (Dougher et al, 2002); the relation between A and B can be taught as one of equivalence, opposition, or difference, to name a few (Barnes & Hampson, 1993). The relational frame theory (Barnes-Holmes & Harte, 2022) has been raised as one strong approach for the study of different kinds of derived stimulus relations; nonetheless, most of the computational models reviewed here are mainly circumscribed to understanding equivalence relations.…”

Talking With Each Other : The Role of Language Environment Factors on Early Language Development From Different Perspectives

“…In my opinion, behaviorism is very much alive. Even up to this day, serious empirical research is published within the field of child language development (e.g., Kirsten & Stewart, 2022;Morgan et al, 2021) as well as modern theoretical work, such as Relational Frame Theory (e.g., Barnes-Holmes & Harte, 2022;Hayes & Hayes, 1992) and Verbal Behavior Developmental Theory (VBDT, Greer & Speckman, 2009). Behaviorists generally question the necessity for mechanistic theories that refer to mental processes as mediating the impact of the environment on behavior (Skinner, 1950).…”