Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1987 Mar;47(2):159–175. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1987.47-159

Stimulus class membership established via stimulus-reinforcer relations.

W V Dube, W J McIlvane, H A Mackay, L T Stoddard
PMCID: PMC1348324  PMID: 3572297

Abstract

In an arbitrary matching-to-sample procedure, two mentally retarded subjects learned conditional discriminations with two sets of stimuli. Each set included a spoken name (N1 or N2), an object (O1 or O2), and a printed symbol (S1 or S2). One subject selected conditionally (a) O1 upon N1, and O2 upon N2, and (b) S1 upon O1, and S2 upon O2. The other subject selected conditionally (a) S1 upon N1, and S2 upon N2, and (b) O1 upon S1, and O2 upon S2. For both subjects, selections of O1 and S1 produced one type of food, F1; selections of O2 and S2 produced a different type of food, F2. Both subjects also learned identity-matching performances, selecting O1, O2, S1, S2, F1, and F2 conditionally upon those stimuli as samples; F1 followed selections of O1, S1, and F1; F2 followed selections of O2, S2, and F2. Matching performances consistent with stimulus class formation involving the names, objects, symbols, and foods were demonstrated on probe trials, even though these performances had not been taught explicitly. Next, new objects, X1 and X2, were presented on identity-matching trials, producing F1 and F2, respectively. Without further training, X1 was selected conditionally upon N1, S1, and O1, and X2 was selected upon N2, S2, and O2. When the contingencies were changed so that selections of X1 and X2 were now followed by F2 and F1, respectively, X2 was selected conditionally upon N1, S1, and O1, and X1 was selected upon N2, S2, and O2. Class membership of X1 and X2 had apparently changed. This study provides evidence that reinforcers may become members of stimulus classes, and that new stimuli may become class members through relations with reinforcers.

Full text

PDF
159

Selected References

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

  1. Brodigan D. L., Peterson G. B. Two-choice conditional discrimination performance of pigeons as a function of reward expectancy, prechoice delay, and domesticity. Anim Learn Behav. 1976 May;4(2):121–124. doi: 10.3758/bf03214021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Carlson J. G., Wielkiewicz R. M. Delay of reinforcement in instrumental discrimination learning of rats. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1972 Nov;81(2):365–370. doi: 10.1037/h0033531. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Carter D. E., Werner T. J. Complex learning and information processing by pigeons: a critical analysis. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 May;29(3):565–601. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.29-565. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. DeLong R. E., Wasserman E. A. Effects of differential reinforcement expectancies on successive matching-to-sample performance in pigeons. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1981 Oct;7(4):394–412. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. 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]
  6. Dixon L. S. The nature of control by spoken words over visual stimulus selection. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 May;27(3):433–442. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1977.27-433. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Lamarre J., Holland J. G. The functional independence of mands and tacts. J Exp Anal Behav. 1985 Jan;43(1):5–19. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1985.43-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Lazar R. M., Davis-Lang D., Sanchez L. The formation of visual stimulus equivalences in children. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 May;41(3):251–266. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.41-251. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Lazar R. Extending sequence-class membership with matching to sample. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 Mar;27(2):381–392. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1977.27-381. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. McDonagh E. C., McIlvane W. J., Stoddard L. T. Teaching coin equivalences via matching to sample. Appl Res Ment Retard. 1984;5(2):177–197. doi: 10.1016/s0270-3092(84)80001-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. McIlvane W. J., Stoddard T. Acquisition of matching - to - sample performances in severe retardation: learning by exclusion. J Ment Defic Res. 1981 Mar;25(Pt 1):33–48. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2788.1981.tb00091.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Pear J. J., Eldridge G. D. The operant-respondent distinction: Future directions. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 Nov;42(3):453–467. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.42-453. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. SHEPP B. E. Some cue properties of anticipated rewards in discrimination learning of retardates. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1962 Oct;55:856–859. doi: 10.1037/h0040940. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Savage-Rumbaugh E. S. Verbal behavior at a procedural level in the chimpanzee. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 Mar;41(2):223–250. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.41-223. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Sidman M., Cresson O., Jr, Willson-Morris M. Acquisition of matching to sample via mediated transfer. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Sep;22(2):261–273. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-261. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. 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]
  17. 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]
  18. 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]
  19. Siegel P. S., Forman G. E. Role of incentive strength in the discrimination learning of the retardate. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1967 Jun;63(3):552–554. doi: 10.1037/h0024675. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Siegel P. S., Schneider R. Discrimination learning of retardates in relation to incentive motivation and attention. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1969 Aug;68(4):656–658. doi: 10.1037/h0027727. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Spradlin J. E., Cotter V. W., Baxley N. Establishing a conditional discrimination without direct training: a study of transfer with retarded adolescents. Am J Ment Defic. 1973 Mar;77(5):556–566. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Stromer R., Osborne J. G. Control of adolescents' arbitrary matching-to-sample by positive and negative stimulus relations. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 May;37(3):329–348. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-329. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Touchette P. E. Transfer of stimulus control: measuring the moment of transfer. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 May;15(3):347–354. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.15-347. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Wetherby B., Karlan G. R., Spradlin J. E. The development of derived stimulus relations through training in arbitrary-matching sequences. J Exp Anal Behav. 1983 Jul;40(1):69–78. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1983.40-69. [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