The effects of different training structures in the establishment of conditional discriminations and subsequent performance on tests for stimulus equivalence

Psychological Record

Volumn 60, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 437-461

  Arntzen, Erik ^a   Grondahl, Terje ^a   Eilifsen, Christoffer ^a  

^a OSLO METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY   (Norway)

Author keywords

Matching to sample; Protocols; Stimulus equivalence; Training structures

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955459679     PISSN: 00332933     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF03395720     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. ARNTZEN, E. (2004). Probability of equivalence formation: Familiar stimuli and training sequence. The Psychological Record, 54, 275-291.
2. ARNTZEN, E. (2007, March). Some procedural variables that might influence equivalence class formation. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Texas Association for Behavior Analysis, Dallas, TX.
3. ARNTZEN, E., & HOLTH, P. (1997). Probability of stimulus equivalence as a function of training design. The Psychological Record, 47, 309-320.
4. ARNTZEN, E., & HOLTH, P. (2000a). Differential probabilities of equivalence outcome in individual subjects as a function of training structure. The Psychological Record, 50, 603-628.
5. ARNTZEN, E., & HOLTH, P. (2000b). Probability of stimulus equivalence as a function of class size vs. number of classes. The Psychological Record, 50, 79-104.
6. ARNTZEN, E., & LIAN, T. (in press). Trained and derived relations with pictures as nodes. The Psychological Record.
7. ARNTZEN, E., & vaidya, M. (2008). The effect of baseline training structure on equivalence class formation in children. Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin, 29, 1-8.
8. BARNES, D. (1994). Stimulus equivalence and relational frame theory. The Psychological Record, 44, 91-124.
9. BENTALL, R. P., JONES, R. M., & DICKINS, D. W. (1999). Errors and response latencies as a function of nodal distance in 5-member equivalence classes. The Psychological Record, 49, 93-115.
10. CARRIGAN, P. F., & SIDMAN, M. (1992). Conditional discrimination and equivalence relations: A theoretical analysis of control by negative stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 58, 183-204.
11. DYMOND, S., & REHFELDT, R. A. (2001). Supplemental measures and derived stimulus relations. Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin, 19,8-12.
12. EILIFSEN, C, & ARNTZEN, E. (2009). On the role of trial types in tests for stimulus equivalence. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 10,187-202.
13. 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.
14. FIELDS, L., HOBBIE-REEVE, 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.
15. 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.
16. GREEN, G., & SAUNDERS, R. R. (1998). Stimulus equivalence. In K. A. Lattal & M. Perone (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in human operant behavior (pp. 229-262). New York: Plenum Press.
17. HOLTH, P., & ARNTZEN, E. (1998). Stimulus familiarity and the delayed emergence of stimulus equivalence or consistent nonequivalence. The Psychological Record, 48, 81-110.
18. 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.
19. HOVE, O. (2003). Differential probability of equivalence class formation following a one-to-many versus a many-to-one training structure. The Psychological Record, 53(4), 617-634.
20. IMAM, A. A. (2006). Experimental control of nodality via equal presentations of conditional discriminations in different equivalence protocols under speed and no-speed conditions. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 85,107-124.
21. JOHNSON, C, & SIDMAN, M. (1993). Conditional discrimination and equivalence relations: Control by negative stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 59, 333-347.
22. KENNEDY, C. H. (1991). Equivalence class formation influenced by the number of nodes separating stimuli. Behavioural Processes, 24, 219-245.
23. 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.
24. SAUNDERS, R. R., CHANEY, L., & MARQUIS, J. G. (2005). Equivalence class establishment with two-, three-, and four-choice matching to sample by senior citizens. The Psychological Record, 55, 539-559.
25. SAUNDERS, R. R., DRAKE, K. M., & SPRADLIN, J. E. (1999). Equivalence class establishment, expansion, and modification in preschool children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71,195-214.
26. 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.
27. SAUNDERS, R. R., & MCENTEE, J. E. (2004). Increasing the probability of stimulus equivalence with adults with mild mental retardation. The Psychological Record, 54(3), 423-435.
28. 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.
29. SIDMAN, M. (1994). Equivalence relations and behavior: A research story. Boston: Authors Cooperative.
30. 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.
31. SPENCER, T. J., & CHASE, P. N. (1996). Speed analysis of stimulus equivalence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 643-659.
32. 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.
33. WILSON, K. M., & MILAN, M. A. (1995). Age differences in the formation of equivalence classes. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 50, 212-218.
34. WULFERT, E., & HAYES, S. C. (1988). Transfer of conditional ordering response through conditional equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 50,125-144.