Characterizing relational operants;Características de las operantes relacionales

Revista Latinoamericana de Psicologia

Volumn 37, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 277-289

  Hayes, Steven C ^a,b,c,d   Quiñones, René M ^a,e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

^b American Psychoogical Association   (United States)

^c Universidad de Nevada en Reno ^*  (United States)

^d Association for the Advancement of Bahavior Therapy   (United States)

^e Universidad de Colombia   (Colombia)

Author keywords

Cognition; Contextualism; Functional operants; Generalized operants; Language; Mechanism; Relational frame theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 26444587167     PISSN: 01200534     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. Baer, D. M., Peterson, R. F. & Sherman, J. A. (1967). The development of imitation by reinforcing behavioral similarity to a model. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 10, 405-416.
2. Barabasi, A-L. (2003). Linked. Nueva York: Penguin Group.
3. Bar-Yam, Y. (2001). Dynamics of complex systems. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
4. Bohm, D. (1980). Wholeness and the implicate order. Nueva York: Routledge.
5. Burgos, J. E. (2003). Laudable goals, interesting experiments, unintelligible theorizing: A critical review of Steven C. Hayes, Dermot Barnes-Holmes, and Bryan Roche's (Eds.) "Relational Frame Theory" (Nueva York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum, 2001). Behavior and Philosophy, 31, 19-45.
6. Dixon, M. R. & Zlomke, K. M. (2005). Implementación del precursor del procedimiento de evaluación relacional en el establecimiento de marcos relacionales de igualdad, oposición y diferencia. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 37, 305-316
7. Catania, A. C. (1998). Learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
8. Catania, A. C. (1973). The psychologies of structure, function, and development. American Psychologist, 28, 434-443.
9. Chu, D., Strand, R. & Fjelland, R. (2003). Theories of complexity. Complexity, 8, 19-30.
10. Dinsmoor, J. A. (1995). Stimulus control: II. The Behavior Analyst, 18, 253-269.
11. Gell-Man, M. (1994). The quark and the jaguar: Adventures in the simple and the complex. Nueva York: Freeman.
12. Gewirtz, J. L. & Stengle, K. G. (1968). Learning of generalized imitation as the basis for identification. Psychological Review, 5, 374-397.
13. Harmon, K., Strong, R. & Pasnak, R. (1982). Relational responses in tests of transposition with rhesus monkeys. Learning and Motivation, 13, 495-504.
14. Hartz, S. M., Ben-Shahar, Y. & Tyler, M. (2001). Logistic growth curve analysis in associative learning data. Animal Cognition, 3, 185-189.
15. Hayes, S. C. (1993). Analytic goals and the varieties of scientific contextualism. En S. C. Hayes, L. J. Hayes, H. W. Reese & T. R. Sarbin (Eds.), Varieties of scientific contextualism (pp. 11-27). Reno, NV: Context Press.
16. Hayes, S. C. & Barnes, D. (1997). Analyzing derived stimulus relations requires more than the concept of stimulus class. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 68, 235-270.
17. Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D. & Roche, B. (Eds.) (2001). Relational Frame Theory: A Post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. Nueva York: Plenum Press.
18. Hayes, S. C., Hayes, L. J. & Reese, H. W. (1988). Finding the philosophical core: A review of Stephen C. Pepper's World Hypotheses. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 50, 97-111.
19. Hayes, S. C., Hayes, L. J., Reese, H. W. & Sarbin, T. R. (Eds.). (1993). Varieties of scientific contextualism. Reno, NV: Context Press.
20. Hayes, S. C., Masuda, A., Bissett, R., Luoma, J. & Guerrero, L. F. (2004). DBT, FAP, and ACT: How empirically oriented are the new behavior therapy technologies? Behavior Therapy, 35, 35-54.
21. Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K. & Wilson, K. G. (1999). Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: An experiential approach to behavior change. Nueva York: Guilford Press.
22. Killeen, P. R. (1989). Behavior as a trajectory through a field of attractors. En J. R. Brink & C. R. Haden (Eds.), The computer and the brain: Perspectives on human and artificial intelligence (pp. 53-82). North Holland: Elsevier.
23. Killeen, P. R. & Hall, S. S. (2001). The principal components of response strength. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 75, 111-134.
24. Malott, R. W. (2003). Behavior analysis and linguistic productivity. Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 19, 11-18.
25. Marr, M. J. (1997). The mechanics of complexity: Dynamical systems span the quick and the dead. En L. J. Hayes & P. M. Ghezzi (Eds.), Investigations in behavioral epistemology (pp. 65-81). Reno: Context Press.
26. Masuda, A., Hayes, S. C., Sackett, C. F. & Twohig, M. P. (2004). Cognitive defusion and self-relevant negative thoughts: Examining the impact of a ninety year old technique. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 477-485.
27. McIlvane, W. J., Dube, W. V. & Callahan, T.D. (1995). Attention: A behavior analytic perspective. En G. R. Lyon & N. A. Krasnegor (Eds.), Attention, memory, and executive function (pp. 97-117). Baltimore: Paul Brookes.
28. McIlvane, W. J., Dube, W. V., Kledaras, J. B., Iennaco, F. M. & Stoddard, L. T. (1990). Teaching relational discrimination to individuals with mental retardation: Some problems and possible solutions. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 95, 283-296.
29. Neuringer, A. (1986). Can people behave "randomly"?: The role of feedback. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 62-75.
30. Ninness, C., Rumph, R., McCuller, G., Harrison, C., Ford, A. M. & Ninness, S. K (En prensa). A functional-analytic approach to computer-interactive mathematics. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.
31. Page, S. & Neuringer, A. (1985). Variability is an operant. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 11, 429-452.
32. Palmer, D. C. (2004). Data in search of a principle: A review of S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, and B. Roche (Eds.), Relational Frame Theory: A Post-Skinnerian Account of Human Language and Cognition. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 81, 189-204.
33. Pryor, K. W., Haag, R. & O'Reilly, J. (1969). The creative porpoise: Training for novel behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 653-661.
34. Skinner, B. F. (1938). The behavior of organisms. Nueva York: Appelton-Century-Crofts.
35. Sporns, O. & Tononi, G. (2002). Classes of network connectivity and dynamics. Complexity, 7, 28-38.
36. Sporns, O. (2003). Network analysis, complexity, and brain function. Complexity, 8, 56-60.
37. Tonneau, F. (2002). Who can understand relational frame theory? A reply to Barnes-Holmes and Hayes. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 3, 95-102.
38. Tonneau, F. (2004). Book review "Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition." British Journal of Psychology, 95, 265-268.
39. Wang, X. F. & Chen, G. (2002) Synchronization in scale-free dynamical networks: Robustness and fragility. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems-1: Fundamental Theory and Applications, 49, 54-62.
40. Watts, D. J. (2003) Six degrees: The science of a connected age. Nueva York: Norton.