The Long-Term Retention Of Generalized Equivalence Classes

Abstract

This experiment examined the retention of generalized equivalence classes. Seventeen subjects completed matching-tosample training, in which two-element stimulus compounds were presented as sample stimuli, and an equivalence test, in which those compounds were separated and each element was tested separately for its entry into equivalence relations with the other stimuli. A generalization test was then conducted, in which dimensional variants (along the dimension of hue) of one member of each class were presented ·as sample stimuli on test trials for two generalized symmetry relations and one generalized equivalence relation. Equivalence and generalization retention tests were conducted for 8 subjects 2-3 months following their initial laboratory session. This experiment also employed a verbal protocol analysis, in which subjects' overt verbal behavior was recorded during both experimental sessions and examined in light of subjects' performances. More subjects demonstrated the retention of symmetry relations than within-compound or equivalence relations, and all subjects who showed the maintenance of equivalence and within-compound relations also showed the maintenance of symmetry relations. Generalized classes were shown to have remained stable over time for some subjects, while other subjects demonstrated the emergence of subject-defined generalized classes during the generalization retention test. Verbal protocol analyses showed that all subjects emitted a relatively greater frequency of verbal descriptions of stimulus relations under extinction testing situations than during training, and class-consistent names for generalized class-members appeared to be likely, but not necessary for the generalization of class membership.When verbally competent subjects are explicitly taught to make a

The Generalization and Retention of Equivalence Relations in Adults With Mental Retardation

“…None of the subjects required remedial training. These results extend the growing body of literature (e.g., Fields et aI., 1996;Fields & Reeve, 2001;Fields et aI., 1997;Fields et aI., 1991;Rehfeldt, 2003;Rehfeldt & Hayes, 2000;Rehfeldt et aI., 1998) illustrating the generalization of equivalence to a range of novel stimuli to individuals with mental retardation, a population of persons whose responding often fails to come under control of relevant stimulus features and generalize to novel stimuli. Importantly, the physical similarity between novel stimuli and an original training stimulus appears to be one condition under which many stimuli enter into equivalence relations.…”

“…The generalization of equivalence relations to a range of novel stimuli has been reported a number of times in studies utilizing verbally competent, adult human subjects (e.g., Fields, Adams, Buffington, Yang, & Verhave, 1996;Fields & Reeve, 2001;Fields, Reeve, Adams, Brown, & Verhave, 1997;Fields, Reeve, Adams, & Verhave, 1991;Rehfeldt, 2003;Rehfeldt & Hayes, 2000;Rehfeldt, Hayes, & Steele, 1998). This body of research has revealed that equivalence relations may generalize to dimensional variants that are physically similar along some dimension to an original training stimulus.…”

“…Of 4 subjects, 3 performed with at least 90% accuracy, while the 4th subject eventually demonstrated 100% accuracy after additional test sessions (Saunders et aI., 1988; see also Spradlin, Saunders, & Saunders, 1992). Another study demonstrated the long-term retention of generalized equivalence relations in adult subjects without developmental disabilities (Rehfeldt & Hayes, 2000). In this study, the generalization of equivalence relations to a range of novel dimensional variants was assessed, and subjects were tested for their ability to demonstrate the generalized relations 2 to 3 months following their original laboratory experience.…”

“…It is important to know the extent to which dimensional variants of original training stimuli will continue to function as members of equivalence relations, and what amount of retraining or repeated testing is necessary to reestablish the generalized relations. Although the long-term retention of generalized equivalence relations has been reported (Rehfeldt & Hayes, 2000), systematic replication is necessary to ascertain the generalizability of the reported effects across subjects and experimental conditions (see Hayes, Barlow, & Nelson-Gray, 1999;Johnston & Pennypacker, 1993). Moreover, because some individuals with mental retardation and related disorders have been suggested to lack a generalized categorization repertoire (Fields, Reeve, Matneja, Varelas, Belanich, Fitzer, & Shamoun, 2002), a systematic replication with this population is important.…”

The interfering effect of emotional stimulus functions on stimulus equivalence class formation: implications for the understanding and treatment of anxiety

“…Partial reversal is more commonly used which involves reversing only some of the trained relations and is usually less successful in reversing the established equivalence relations. While some suggestions have been made (e.g., as to the conditions under which established equivalence relations can be reorganised the general finding is that equivalence relations, once formed are difficult to change (e.g., Follette, 1998;Rehfeldt & Hayes, 2000;Wirth & Chase, 2002), with symmetry relations generally more sensitive to contingency reversals than symmetric transitivity (equivalence) relations (Smeets, et al, 2003).…”