Skip to main content
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 2001 Nov;76(3):339–349. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2001.76-339

A precursor to the relational evaluation procedure: searching for the contextual cues that control equivalence responding.

V A Cullinan 1, D Barne-Holmes 1, P M Smeets 1
PMCID: PMC1284842  PMID: 11768715

Abstract

The precursor to the relational evaluation procedure (pREP) is a go/no-go successive discrimination procedure for examining stimulus equivalence. Previous research has shown that it does not readily produce equivalence responding unless some matching-to-sample (MTS) procedures are incorporated into the experimental sequence. Two experiments attempted to identify contextual cues that would generate equivalence responding on the pREP. Experiment 1 examined the effects of using abstract symbols or various verbal labels as response options on the pREP. Only the words same and different, when used as response options, reliably produced equivalence responding across 4 subjects. Experiment 2 examined different pretraining preparations designed to attach the functions of the words same and different to abstract symbols that could then be used as response options on the pREP. The most effective pretraining procedure involved multiple-exemplar training during which subjects were trained to respond to abstract symbols in the presence of pairs of stimuli that were either formally the same or different. The abstract symbols were subsequently used as response options with the pREP, and all subjects reliably demonstrated equivalence responding. The findings suggest that the relations of same and different may be fundamental to equivalence responding. These findings are discussed in terms of what they suggest about the nature of the equivalence phenomenon specifically and derived relational responding more generally.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (135.6 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Carrigan P. F., Sidman M. Conditional discrimination and equivalence relations: A theoretical analysis of control by negative stimuli. J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 Jul;58(1):183–204. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1992.58-183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Devany J. M., Hayes S. C., Nelson R. O. Equivalence class formation in language-able and language-disabled children. J Exp Anal Behav. 1986 Nov;46(3):243–257. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1986.46-243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Dinsmoor J. A. Stimuli inevitably generated by behavior that avoids electric shock are inherently reinforcing. J Exp Anal Behav. 2001 May;75(3):311–333. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2001.75-311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Dymond S., Barnes D. A transfer of self-discrimination response functions through equivalence relations. J Exp Anal Behav. 1994 Sep;62(2):251–267. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1994.62-251. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Dymond S., Barnes D. A transformation of self-discrimination response functions in accordance with the arbitrarily applicable relations of sameness, more than, and less than. J Exp Anal Behav. 1995 Sep;64(2):163–184. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1995.64-163. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Pilgrim C., Galizio M. Relations between baseline contingencies and equivalence probe performances. J Exp Anal Behav. 1990 Nov;54(3):213–224. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1990.54-213. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Pilgrim C., Galizio M. Reversal of baseline relations and stimulus equivalence: I. Adults. J Exp Anal Behav. 1995 May;63(3):225–238. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1995.63-225. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Roche B., Barnes D., Smeets P. Incongruous stimulus pairing and conditional discrimination training: effects on relational responding. J Exp Anal Behav. 1997 Sep;68(2):143–160. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1997.68-143. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Saunders R. R., Drake K. M., Spradlin J. E. Equivalence class establishment, expansion, and modification in preschool children. J Exp Anal Behav. 1999 Mar;71(2):195–214. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1999.71-195. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Steele D., Hayes S. C. Stimulus equivalence and arbitrarily applicable relational responding. J Exp Anal Behav. 1991 Nov;56(3):519–555. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1991.56-519. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Wulfert E., Dougher M. J., Greenway D. E. Protocol analysis of the correspondence of verbal behavior and equivalence class formation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1991 Nov;56(3):489–504. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1991.56-489. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior are provided here courtesy of Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

RESOURCES