Equivalence outcome in single subjects as a function of training structure

Psychological Record

Volumn 50, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 603-628

  Arntzen, Erik ^a   Holth, Per ^b  

^a OSLO METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY   (Norway)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0041152047     PISSN: 00332933     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF03395374     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. ARNTZEN, E., & HOLTH, P. (1997). Probability of stimulus equivalence as a function of training design. The Psychological Record, 47, 309-320.
2. ARNTZEN, E., & HOLTH, P. (2000). Probability of stimulus equivalence as a function of class size vs. number of classes. The Psychological Record, 50, 79-104.
3. BARNES, D. (1994). Stimulus equivalence and relational frame theory. The Psychological Record, 44, 91-124.
4. BUFFINGTON, D. M., FIELDS, L., & ADAMS, B. J. (1997). Enhancing equivalence class formation by pretraining of other equivalence classes. The Psychological Record, 47, 69-96.
5. FIELDS, L., ADAMS, B. J., NEWMAN, S., & VERHAVE, T. (1990). The effects of nodality on the formation of equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 53, 345-358.
6. FIELDS, L., HOBBIE, S. A., ADAMS, B. J., & REEVE, K. F. (1999) Effects of training directionality and class size on equivalence class formation by adults. The Psychological Record, 49, 703-724.
7. FIELDS, L., LANDON-JIMENEZ, D. V., BUFFINGTON, D. M., & ADAMS, B. J. (1995). Maintained nodal-distance effects in equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 64, 129-145.
8. FIELDS, L., REEVE, K. F., ROSEN, D., VARELAS, A., ADAMS, B. J., BELANICH, J., & HOBBIE, S. A. (1997). Using the simultaneous protocol to study equivalence class formation: the facilitating effects of nodal number and size of previously established equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 67, 367-389.
9. HAYES, S. C. (1991). A relational control theory of stimulus equivalence. In L. J. Hayes & P. N. Chase (Eds.), Dialogues on verbal behavior (pp. 19-40). Reno, NV: Context Press.
10. HOLTH, P., & ARNTZEN, E. (1998). Stimulus familiarity and the delayed emergence of stimulus equivalence or consistent nonequivalence. The Psychological Record, 48, 81-110.
11. HOLTH, P., & ARNTZEN, E. (2000). Reaction times and the emergence of class consistent responding: A case for precurrent responding? The Psychological Record, 50, 305-338.
12. SAUNDERS, K. J., SAUNDERS, R. R., WILLIAMS, D. C., & SPRADLIN, J. E. (1993). An interaction of instructions and training design on stimulus class formation: Extending the analysis of equivalence. The Psychological Record, 43, 725-744.
13. SAUNDERS, R. R., DRAKE, K. M., & SPRADLIN, J. E. (1999). Equivalence class development, expansion, and modification in preschool children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71, 195-214.
14. SAUNDERS, R. R., & GREEN, G. (1999). A discrimination analysis of training structure effects on stimulus equivalence outcomes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 72, 117-137.
15. SAUNDERS, R. R., WACHTER, J. A., & SPRADLIN, J. E. (1988). Establishing auditory stimulus control over an eight-member equivalence class via conditional discrimination procedure. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 49, 95-115.
16. SIDMAN, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research. New York: Basic Books.
17. SIDMAN, M. (1987). Two choices are not enough. Behavior Analysis, 22, 11-18.
18. SIDMAN, M. (1994). Equivalence relations and behavior: A research story. Boston: Authors Cooperative.
19. SIDMAN, M., & TAILBY, W. (1982). Conditional discrimination vs. matching to sample: An expansion of the testing paradigm. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 5-22.
20. SPENCER, T. J., & CHASE, P. N. (1996). Speed analysis of stimulus equivalence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 643-659.
21. SPRADLIN, J. E., & SAUNDERS, R. R. (1986). The development of stimulus classes using match-to-sample procedures: Sample classification versus comparison classification. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 6, 41-58.
22. URCUIOLI, P. J., ZENTALL, T. R., JACKSON-SMITH, P., & STEIRN, J. N. (1989). Evidence for common coding in many-to-one matching: Retention, intertrial interference, and transfer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 15, 264-273.