Relational Frame Theory is a Behavior Analytic Account: Is Tonneau’s?

European Journal of Behavior Analysis

Volumn 3, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 87-94

  Barnes Holmes, Dermot ^a   Hayes, Steven C ^b  

^a NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND   (Ireland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0346720134     PISSN: None     EISSN: 2377729X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15021149.2002.11434208     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Barnes, D. (1994). Stimulus equivalence and relational frame theory. The Psychological Record, 44, 91–124.
2. Barnes, D., & Hampson, P. J. (1993). Stimulus equivalence and connectionism: Implications for behavior analysis and cognitive science. The Psychological Record, 43, 617–638.
3. Bar nes, D., & Hampson, P. J. (1997). Connectionist models of arbitrarily applicable relational responding: A possible role for the hippocampal system. In J. Donahoe & V. P. Dorsel (Eds.) Neural-network models of cognition (pp. 496–521). North-Holland: Elsevier.
4. Barnes, D., Hegarty, N., & Smeets, P. M. (1997). Relating equivalence relations to equivalence relations: A relational framing model of complex human functioning. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 14, 57–83.
5. Barnes, D., & Holmes, Y. (1991). Radical behaviorism, stimulus equivalence, and human cognition. The Psychological Record, 41, 19–31.
6. Barnes, D., & Roche, B. (1996). Relational frame theory and stimulus equivalence are fundamentally different: A reply to Saunders. The Psychological Record, 46, 489–508.
7. Barnes, D., Smeets, P. M., & Leader, G. (1996). Procedures for generating emergent matching performances: Implications for stimulus equivalence. In T. R. Zentall and P. M. Smeets (Eds.), Stimulus class formation in humans and animals (pp. 153–171). Holland: Elsevier.
8. Barnes-Holmes, D. (2000). Behavioral pragmatism: No place for reality and truth. The Behavior Analyst, 23, 191–202.
9. Barnes-Holmes, D., & Barnes-Holmes, Y. (2000). Explaining complex behavior: Two perspectives on the concept of generalized operant classes. The Psychological Record, 50, 251–265.
10. Barnes-Holmes, Y. (2001). Analyzing relational frames: Studying language and cognition in young children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National University of Ireland, Maynooth.
11. Barnes-Holmes, Y., Barnes-Holmes, D., Roche, B., & Smeets, P. M. (2001a). Exemplar training and a derived transformation of functions in accordance with symmetry. The Psychological Record, 51, 287–308.
12. Barnes-Holmes, Y., Barnes-Holmes, D., Roche, B., & Smeets, P. M. (2001b). Exemplar training and a derived transformation of functions in accordance with symmetry: II. The Psychological Record. 51, 589–604.
13. Catania, A. C. (2001). The roles of responses and stimuli in functional equivalence. Euorpean Journal of Behavior Analysis, 2, 42–45.
14. Cullinan, V., Barnes, D., & Smeets, P. M. (1998). A precursor to the relational evaluation procedures: Analyzing stimulus equivalence. The Psychological Record, 48, 121–145.
15. Cullinan, V., Barnes, D., Hampson, P. J., & Lyddy, F. (1994). A transfer of explicitly and nonexplicitly trained sequence responses through equivalence relations: An experimental demonstration and connectionist model. The Psychological Record, 44, 559–585.
16. Cullinan, V., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Smeets, P. M. (2000). A precursor to the relational evaluation procedure: Analyzing stimulus equivalence II. The Psychological Record, 50, 467–492.
17. Cullinan, V., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Smeets, P. M. (2001). Precursor to the relational evaluation procedure: The search for the contextual cues that control equivalence responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 76, 339–349.
18. Delius, J. D. (2001). The what and how of equivalencies. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 2, 49–53.
19. Dymond, S., & Barnes, D. (1995). A transformation of self-discrimination response functions in accordance with the arbitrarily applicable relations of sameness, more-than, and less-than. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 64, 163–184.
20. Gomez, S., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Luciano, M. C. (2001). Generalized break equivalence I. The Psychological Record, 51, 89–110.
21. Gomez, S., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Luciano, M. C. (in press). Generalized break equivalence II: Contextual control over a generalized pattern of stimulus relations. The Psychological Record.
22. Hall, G. (2001). Mechanisms of functional equivalence. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 2, 69–70.
23. Hayes, L. J. (1992). Equivalence as process. In S. C. Hayes & L. J. Hayes (Eds.), Understanding Verbal Relations (pp. 97–108). Reno, NV: Context Press.
24. 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.
25. Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). (Eds.), Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Plenum Press.
26. Hayes, S. C., Gifford, E. V., & Wilson, K. G. (1996). Stimulus classes and stimulus relations: Arbitrarily applicable relational responding as an operant. In T. R. Zentall & P. M. Smeets (Eds.), Stimulus class formation in humans and animals (pp. 279–299). New York: Elsevier.
27. Hayes, S. C., & Hayes, L. J. (1989). The verbal action of the listener as the basis for rule-governance. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: Cognition, contingencies, and instructional control, (pp. 153–190). New York: Plenum.
28. Healy, O., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Smeets, P. M. (2000). Derived relational responding as generalized operant behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74, 207–227.
29. Leader, G., Barnes, D., & Smeets, P. M. (1996). Establishing equivalence relations using a respondent-type training procedure. The Psychological Record, 46, 685–706.
30. Leader, G., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Smeets, P. M. (2000). Establishing equivalence relations using a respondent-type procedure III. The Psychological Record, 50, 63–78.
31. Leader, G., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2001a). Establishing fraction-decimal equivalence using a respondent-type training procedure. The Psychological Record, 51, 151–166.
32. Leader, G., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2001b). Matching-to-sample and respondenttype training as methods for producing equivalence relations: Isolating the critical variables. The Psychological Record, 51, 429–444.
33. Luciano, M. C., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2001). Early verbal developmental history and equivalence relations. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 1, 137–149.
34. Lyddy, F., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Hampson, P. J. (2001). A transfer of sequence function via equivalence in a connectionist network. The Psychological Record, 51, 409–428.
35. Moore, J. (2000). Varieties of scientific explanation. The Behavior Analyst, 23, 173–190.
36. Moore, J. (2001). On the operational analysis of psychological terms: “equivalence.” European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 2, 78–80.
37. O’Hora, D., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). Developing a procedure to model the establishment of instructional control. Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin, 19, 11–13.
38. Roche, B., & Barnes, D. (1997). A transformation of respondently conditioned stimulus function in accordance with arbitrarily applicable relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 67, 275–300.
39. Roche, B., Barnes-Holmes, D., Smeets, P. M., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & McGeady, S. (2000). Contextual control over the derived transformation of discriminative and sexual arousal functions. The Psychological Record, 50, 267–291.
40. Smeets, P. M., Leader, G., & Barnes, D. (1997). Establishing stimulus classes with adults and children using a respondent training procedure: A follow-up study. The Psychological Record, 47, 285–308.
41. Steele, D. L., & Hayes, S. C. (1991). Stimulus equivalence and arbitrarily applicable relational responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56, 519–555.
42. Tonneau, F. (2001). Equivalence relations: A critical analysis. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 2, 1–33
43. Watkins, M. (1990). Mediationism and the obfuscation of memory. American Psychologist, 45, 328–335.