Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 2002 Nov;78(3):237–248. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2002.78-237

Categorization, concept learning, and behavior analysis: an introduction.

Thomas R Zentall 1, Mark Galizio 1, Thomas S Critchfied 1
PMCID: PMC1284898  PMID: 12507002

Abstract

Categorization and concept learning encompass some of the most important aspects of behavior, but historically they have not been central topics in the experimental analysis of behavior. To introduce this special issue of the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior (JEAB), we define key terms; distinguish between the study of concepts and the study of concept learning; describe three types of concept learning characterized by the stimulus classes they yield; and briefly identify several other themes (e.g., quantitative modeling and ties to language) that appear in the literature. As the special issue demonstrates, a surprising amount and diversity of work is being conducted that either represents a behavior-analytic perspective or can inform or constructively challenge this perspective.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (123.5 KB).

Selected References

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

  1. Barnett Susan M., Ceci Stephen J. When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychol Bull. 2002 Jul;128(4):612–637. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.612. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. 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]
  3. Cook R. G., Katz J. S., Cavoto B. R. Pigeon same-different concept learning with multiple stimulus classes. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1997 Oct;23(4):417–433. doi: 10.1037//0097-7403.23.4.417. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Dube W. V., McIlvane W. J., Maguire R. W., Mackay H. A., Stoddard L. T. Stimulus class formation and stimulus-reinforcer relations. J Exp Anal Behav. 1989 Jan;51(1):65–76. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1989.51-65. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Galizio M., Stewart K. L., Pilgrim C. Clustering in artificial categories: an equivalence analysis. Psychon Bull Rev. 2001 Sep;8(3):609–614. doi: 10.3758/bf03196197. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. HERRNSTEIN R. J., LOVELAND D. H. COMPLEX VISUAL CONCEPT IN THE PIGEON. Science. 1964 Oct 23;146(3643):549–551. doi: 10.1126/science.146.3643.549. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hayes S. C. Nonhumans have not yet shown stimulus equivalence. J Exp Anal Behav. 1989 May;51(3):385–392. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1989.51-385. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hernstein R. J., Loveland D. H., Cable C. Natural concepts in pigeons. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1976 Oct;2(4):285–302. doi: 10.1037//0097-7403.2.4.285. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Herrnstein R. J. Levels of stimulus control: a functional approach. Cognition. 1990 Nov;37(1-2):133–166. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(90)90021-b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Horne P. J., Lowe C. F. On the origins of naming and other symbolic behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1996 Jan;65(1):185–241. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1996.65-185. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Kastak C. R., Schusterman R. J., Kastak D. Equivalence classification by California sea lions using class-specific reinforcers. J Exp Anal Behav. 2001 Sep;76(2):131–158. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2001.76-131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Lane S. D., Clow J. K., Innis A., Critchfield T. S. Generalization of cross-modal stimulus equivalence classes: operant processes as components in human category formation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1998 Nov;70(3):267–279. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1998.70-267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Lane S. D., Critchfield T. S. Classification of vowels and consonants by individuals with moderate mental retardation: development of arbitrary relations via match-to-sample training with compound stimuli. J Appl Behav Anal. 1998 Spring;31(1):21–41. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1998.31-21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Manabe K., Kawashima T., Staddon J. E. Differential vocalization in budgerigars: towards an experimental analysis of naming. J Exp Anal Behav. 1995 Jan;63(1):111–126. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1995.63-111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. McDaniel M. A., Neufeld K. H., Damico-Nettleton S. Many-to-one and one-to-many associative learning in a naturalistic task. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2001 Sep;7(3):182–194. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. NEWMAN F. L., BARON M. R. STIMULUS GENERALIZATION ALONG THE DIMENSION OF ANGULARITY: A COMPARISON OF TRAINING PROCEDURES. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1965 Aug;60:59–63. doi: 10.1037/h0022334. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. 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]
  18. Saunders R. R., Green G. A discrimination analysis of training-structure effects on stimulus equivalence outcomes. J Exp Anal Behav. 1999 Jul;72(1):117–137. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1999.72-117. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Sidman M. Equivalence relations and the reinforcement contingency. J Exp Anal Behav. 2000 Jul;74(1):127–146. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2000.74-127. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Sidman M., Kirk B., Willson-Morris M. Six-member stimulus classes generated by conditional-discrimination procedures. J Exp Anal Behav. 1985 Jan;43(1):21–42. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1985.43-21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Sidman M., Rauzin R., Lazar R., Cunningham S., Tailby W., Carrigan P. A search for symmetry in the conditional discriminations of rhesus monkeys, baboons, and children. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Jan;37(1):23–44. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Sidman M. Reading and auditory-visual equivalences. J Speech Hear Res. 1971 Mar;14(1):5–13. doi: 10.1044/jshr.1401.05. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Sidman M., Tailby W. Conditional discrimination vs. matching to sample: an expansion of the testing paradigm. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Jan;37(1):5–22. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Thompson R. K., Oden D. L., Boysen S. T. Language-naive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) judge relations between relations in a conceptual matching-to-sample task. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1997 Jan;23(1):31–43. doi: 10.1037//0097-7403.23.1.31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Zentall T. R., Hogan E. Same/different concept learning in the pigeon: the effect of negative instances and prior adaptation to transfer stimuli. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Sep;30(2):177–186. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.30-177. [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