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):375–396. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2002.78-375

A functional-analytic model of analogy: a relational frame analysis.

Ian Stewart 1, Dermot Barnes-Holmes 1, Bryan Roche 1, Paul M Smeets 1
PMCID: PMC1284906  PMID: 12507010

Abstract

The aim of this study was to explore a behavior-analytic model of analogical reasoning, defined as the discrimination of formal similarity via equivalence-equivalence responding. In Experiment 1, adult humans were trained and tested for the formation of four three-member equivalence relations: A1-B1-C1, A2-B2-C2, A3-B3-C3, and A4-B4-C4. The B and C stimuli were three-letter nonsense syllables, and the A stimulus was a colored shape. Subjects were then successfully tested for equivalence-equivalence responding (e.g., matching B1/C1 to B2/C2 rather than B3/C4). These tasks were designed such that equivalence-equivalence responding might allow subjects to discriminate a physical similarity between the relations involved. Some participants (color subjects) received only equivalence-equivalence tasks in which they might discriminate a color relation, whereas others (shape subjects) were given tasks in which they might discriminate a shape relation. A control group received both types of task. In a subsequent test for the discrimination of formal similarity, color subjects matched according to color, shape subjects matched according to shape, and the control group showed no consistent matching pattern. In Experiment 2, adult humans showed a transformation of the functions of a block-sorting task via this basic model of analogy. Empirical and conceptual issues related to these results are discussed.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (215.0 KB).

Selected References

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

  1. Barnes D., Keenan M. A transfer of functions through derived arbitrary and nonarbitrary stimulus relations. J Exp Anal Behav. 1993 Jan;59(1):61–81. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1993.59-61. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bush K. M., Sidman M., de Rose T. Contextual control of emergent equivalence relations. J Exp Anal Behav. 1989 Jan;51(1):29–45. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1989.51-29. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Carr D., Wilkinson K. M., Blackman D., McIlvane W. J. Equivalence classes in individuals with minimal verbal repertoires. J Exp Anal Behav. 2000 Jul;74(1):101–114. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2000.74-101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. 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]
  5. 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]
  6. 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]
  7. 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]
  8. Fields L., Verhave T., Fath S. Stimulus equivalence and transitive associations: A methodological analysis. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 Jul;42(1):143–157. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.42-143. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Goswami U., Brown A. L. Higher-order structure and relational reasoning: contrasting analogical and thematic relations. Cognition. 1990 Sep;36(3):207–226. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(90)90057-q. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Hayes S. C., Kohlenberg B. S., Hayes L. J. The transfer of specific and general consequential functions through simple and conditional equivalence relations. J Exp Anal Behav. 1991 Jul;56(1):119–137. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1991.56-119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. 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]
  12. Hayes S., Barnes D. Analyzing derived stimulus relations requires more than the concept of stimulus class. J Exp Anal Behav. 1997 Sep;68(2):235–244. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1997.68-235. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. 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]
  14. Saunders R. R., Wachter J., Spradlin J. E. Establishing auditory stimulus control over an eight-member equivalence class via conditional discrimination procedures. J Exp Anal Behav. 1988 Jan;49(1):95–115. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1988.49-95. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. 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]
  16. 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]

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

RESOURCES