Generic response classes and relational frame theory: Response to Hayes and Barnes-Holmes

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

Volumn 82, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 225-234

  Palmer, David C ^a  

^a SMITH COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Generic units; Mediating behavior; Relational frame theory; Relational frames; Response classes; Stimulus classes; Units of analysis; Verbal behavior

Indexed keywords

EID: 8644270693     PISSN: 00225002     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2004.82-225     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. Blakely, E., & Schlinger, H. (1987). Function-altering contingency-specifying stimuli. The Behavior Analyst, 10, 183-187.
2. 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 (New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum, 2001). Behavior and Philosophy, 31, 19-45.
3. Chomsky, N. (1971). The case against B. F. Skinner. The New York Review of Books, 17, 18-24.
4. Donahoe, J. W., & Palmer, D. C. (1989). The interpretation of complex human behavior: Some reactions to Parallel Distributed Processing. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 399-416.
5. Donahoe, J. W., & Palmer, D. C. (1994). Learning and complex behavior. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
6. Donahoe, J. W., Palmer, D. C., & Burgos, J. (1997). The S-R issue: Its status in behavior analysis and in Donahoe and Palmer's Learning and Complex Behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 67, 193-273. (includes commentaries and reply)
7. Galizio, M. (2004). Relational frames: Where do they come from? A comment on Barnes-Holmes and Hayes (2003). The Behavior Analyst, 27, 107-112.
8. Hayes, S. C., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2004). Relational operants: Processes and implications: A response to Palmer's review of Relational Frame Theory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 82, 213-224.
9. Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001a). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
10. Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001b). Relational frame theory: A précis. In S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, & B. Roche (Eds.). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition (pp. 141-154). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
11. Hayes, S. C., Fox, E., Gifford, E. V., Wilson, K., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Healy, O. (2001). Derived relational responding as learned behavior. In S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, & B. Roche (Eds.), Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition (pp. 21-49). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
12. Lowenkron, B. (1988). Generalization of delayed identity matching in retarded children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 50, 163-172.
13. Lowenkron, B. (1991). Joint control and the generation of selection-based verbal behavior. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 9, 121-126.
14. Lowenkron, B. (1998). Some logical functions of joint control. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 69, 327-354.
15. Lowenkron, B. (2004). Meaning: A verbal behavior account. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 20, 77-97.
16. Malott, R. W. (2003). Behavior analysis and linguistic productivity. Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 19, 11-18.
17. Malott, R. W., & Suarez, E. A. T. (2004). Principles of behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
18. Palmer, D. C. (1991). A behavioral interpretation of memory. In L. J. Hayes & P. N. Chase (Eds.), Dialogues on verbal behavior (pp. 261-279). Reno, NV: Context Press.
19. Palmer, D. C. (1997). Selectionist constraints on neural networks. In J. W. Donahoe & V. Packard Dorsel (Eds.), Neural network models of cognition: Biobehavioral foundations (pp. 263-292). Netherlands: Elsevier Science Press.
20. Palmer, D. C. (1998a). On Skinner's rejection of S-R psychology. The Behavior Analyst, 21, 93-96.
21. Palmer, D. C. (1998b). The speaker as listener: The interpretation of structural regularities in verbal behavior. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 15, 3-16.
22. Palmer, D. C. (2000a). Chomsky's nativism: A critical review. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 17, 39-50. (Original work published 1986)
23. Palmer, D. C. (2000b). Chomsky's nativism reconsidered. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 17, 51-56.
24. Palmer, D. C. (2003). Cognition. In K. A. Lattal & P. N. Chase (Eds.), Behavior theory and philosophy (pp. 167-185). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
25. 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.
26. Palmer, D. C., & Donahoe, J. W. (1992). Essentialism and selectionism in cognitive science and behavior analysis. American Psychologist, 47, 1344-1358.
27. Palmer, D. C., Eshleman, J., Brandon, P., Layng, T. V. J., McDonough, C., Michael, J., et al. (2004). Dialogue on private events. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 20, 111-128.
28. Schlinger, H. (1990). A reply to behavior analysts writing about rules and rule-governed behavior. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 8, 77-82.
29. Schlinger, H., & Blakely, E. (1987). Function-altering effects of contingency-specifying stimuli. The Behavior Analyst, 10, 41-45.
30. Sidman, M. (1994). Equivalence relations and behavior: A research story. Boston: Authors' Cooperative.
31. Sidman, M. (2000). Equivalence relations and the reinforcement contingency. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74, 127-146.
32. Skinner, B. F. (1938). Behavior of organisms. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
33. Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century- Crofts.
34. Skinner, B. F. (1999a). The generic nature of the concepts of stimulus and response. In B. F. Skinner, Cumulative record: Definitive edition (pp. 504-524). Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group. (Original work published 1935)
35. Skinner, B. F. (1999b). The analysis of behavior. In B. F. Skinner, Cumulative record: Definitive edition (pp. 101-107). Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group. (Original work published 1953)
36. Spradlin, J. E. (2003). Alternative theories of the origin of derived stimulus relations. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 19, 3-6.
37. Tonneau, F. (2001). Equivalence relations: A critical analysis. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 2, 1-128. (includes commentary)
38. Tonneau, F. (2002). Who can understand relational frame theory? A reply to Barnes-Holmes and Hayes. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 3, 95-102.
39. Tonneau, F., & González, C. (2004). Function transfer in human operant experiments: The role of stimulus pairings. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 81, 239-255.
40. Vaughan, W., Jr. (1988). Formation of stimulus sets in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 14, 36-42.