Verbs and Verb Phrases as Instructional Stimuli in the Control of Stimulus-Equivalence Effects

Abstract

This research examined in 26 undergraduate students a form of instructional control of certain emergent relations definitional of the stimulus-equivalence relationship. The subjects read 2 pages that explained a paper-and-pencil match-to-sample procedure, and then went on to solve 11 more pages of matching-to-sample problems. Each of the first 10 of these last 11 pages was introduced by an instruction of the form , "Matches means [verb]," for example, "Matches means EATS," followed by the facts that established two related pages, 5 specifying a verb as the meaning of "matches" used equivalence verbs (EQUALS, IS, IS PARALLEL TO, GOES WITH, and MATCHES); another 5 specified nonequivalence verbs (EATS, OWES, PAYS, LIKES, and TEACHES). For 15 of 25 subjects, different verbs differentially controlled the emergence of the untrained relations revealing the symmetry, transitivity, and symmetric-transitivity properties of the original relations. For the remaining 10 subjects, these untrained relations either emerged uniformly despite verb differences (5 subjects), or were absent despite verb differences (5 subjects). The types of verbs or explanations provided by the subjects in response to the 11th problem, which offered no verb but requested an explanation of how the subjects had answered the probes, always reflected each subject's prior equivalence or nonequivalence responding to the earlier probes. Thus, imposing relevant instructions on two directly established interlocking conditional discriminations can account for much of the emergence of the new, untrained relations definitional of equivalence relations.Reprints of this article can be obtained from Jesus Rosales-Ruiz at Department of Behavior Analysis, University of North Texas, Denton, TX 76203. We are grateful to Richard

Effect of the qualifying autoclitic “is” in conditional discrimination training and equivalence tests.

“…The performance of the participants in the Experimental Group corroborates the results of Rosales-Ruiz, Eikeseth, Duarte and Baer (2000). The authors noted that participants that were under the control of verbs related to equivalence showed a higher performance than those who were under the control of verbs not related to equivalence.…”

“…Similar conclusions are found in Braam & Malott, 1990;Catania, 2003;andShimoff, 1982. Rosales-Ruiz, Eikeseth, Duarte andBaer (2000) studied the effect of verbal behavior by manipulating instructions and checking its effects upon the acquisition of conditional discrimination and equivalence tests. The authors noted that a specific verbal behavior of the participants produced a better acquisition in the establishment of conditional discrimination and stimulus equivalence.…”

“…The authors concluded that the participants established meanings, syntactic relations or ordinal sequences among the stimuli and they also concluded that verbs could have been functioned as contextual stimuli for the conditional relations learned. Rosales-Ruiz, Eikeseth, Duarte and Baer (2000) show an instigating research on the effect of verbal behavior upon conditional discrimination and stimuli equivalence. Two critiques can be made in regard to the study: the first, related to the procedure used and the second, to the analysis of the data; (a) it is not possible to guarantee that all the participants read the controlling verbs and (b) an autoclitic analysis of the controlling verbs was not done since the procedure manipulated only the printed version of different verbs (and not the verbal response of the participants).…”

Efeitos das verbalizações do autoclítico \"E\" durante treinos e testes de discriminações condicionais e de relações de equivalência

“…Uma vez que autoclíticos envolvidos na formação de classes de equivalência são operantes verbais de segunda ordem, mais complexos que os operantes verbais de primeira ordem. Torna-se compreensível a dificuldade no estabelecimento de relações de equivalência da área (e.g., Devany, Hayes, & Nelson, 1986;Barnes, McCullagh, & Keenan, 1990;Wulfert, Dougher, & Greenway, 1991;Eikeseth & Smith, 1992;Martinez-Sanches & Ribes-Iñesta, 1996;Peláez, Gewirtz, Sanchez, & Mahabir, 2000;Brady & McLean, 2000;Rosales-Ruiz, Eikeseth, Duarte, & Baer, 2000;Hojo, 2002;Carp & Petursdottir, 2015), nesse sentido verbalizações autoclíticas podem facilitar as relações de equivalência.…”

“…Além dos parâmetros experimentais supracitados, a relação entre o comportamento verbal e a formação de discriminações condicionais e equivalência de estímulos tem sido alvo de inúmeras pesquisas (Devany, Hayes & Nelson, 1986;Barnes, McCullagh & Kennan, 1990;Wulfert, Dougher & Greenway, 1991;Eikeseth & Smith, 1992;Horne & Lowe, 1996;Martinez & Ribes, 1996;Peláez, Gewirtz, Sanchez & Mahabir, 2000;Brady & McLean, 2000;Rosales, Eikeseth, Duarte & Baer, 2000;Hojo, 2002;O'Donnell e Saunders, 2003;Martinez & Tamayo 2005; O'Connor, Rafferty, Barnes-Holmes, & Barnes-Holmes, 2009;Carp & Petursdottir, 2015;Miguel, 2016;Ma, Miguel, & Jennings, 2016 Participaram da pesquisa 25 estudantes universitários. Nesta pesquisa foi utilizado um livro de exercícios contendo 13 páginas.…”