Abstract
Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, and Roche (2001) have edited a series of tightly integrated articles that present the relational frame theory (RFT) approach to the study of complex human behavior. The book provides a well-elaborated account of RFT and reviews the literature on stimulus relations that bears on the approach. Several articles examine extensions of RFT to a variety of issues ranging from language and cognition to psychotherapy and religion, and these provide illustrations of the comprehensiveness of the approach. Although RFT is a paradigm developed within the behavioral tradition, it is not a traditional behavioral paradigm, and thus has been controversial. Problems and puzzles in the study of stimulus relations and research directions needed for their solution are considered.
Article PDF
We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.
Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
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.
Barnes-Holmes, Y., Barnes-Holmes, D., Roche, B., & Smeets, P. M. (2001a). Exemplar training and a derived transformation of function in accordance with symmetry. The Psychological Record, 51, 287–308.
Barnes-Holmes, Y., Barnes-Holmes, D., Roche, B., & Smeets, P. M. (2001b). Exemplar training and a derived transformation of function in accordance with symmetry: II. The Psychological Record, 51, 589–604.
Clayton, M. C., & Hayes, L. J. (1999). Conceptual differences in the analysis of stimulus equivalence. The Psychological Record, 49, 145–161.
Dougher, M. J., Augustson, E. M., Markham, M., R., Greenway, D. E., & Wulfert, E. (1994). The transfer of respondent eliciting and extinction functions through stimulus equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 62, 331–351.
Dube, W. V., & McIlvane, W. J. (1995). Stim-ulus-reinforcer relations and emergent matching to sample. The Psychological Record, 45, 591–612.
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.
Estevez, A. F., Fuentes, L. J., Mari-Beffa, P., Gonzalez, C., & Alvarez, D. (2001). The differential outcome effect as a useful tool to improve conditional discrimination learning in children. Learning and Motivation, 32, 48–64.
Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N., & Fitch, W. T. (2002). The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science, 298, 1569–1579.
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.
Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skin-nerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Hayes, S. C., & Hayes, L. J. (1989). The verbal action of the listener as a basis for rule-governance. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: Cognition, contingencies and instructional control (pp. 153–190). New York: Plenum.
Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K., & Wilson, K. G. (1999). Acceptance and commitment therapy: An experiential approach to behavior change. New York: Guilford.
Hayes, S. C., Zettle, R. D., & Rosenfarb, I. (1989). Rule-following. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: Cognition, contingencies and instructional control (pp. 191–220). New York: Plenum.
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.
Horne, P. J., & Lowe, C. F. (1996). On the origins of naming and other symbolic behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 185–241.
Kastak, C. R., & Schusterman, R. J. (2002). Sealions and equivalence: Expanding classes by exclusion. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 78, 449–466.
Leigland, S. (1997). Is a new definition of verbal behavior necessary in light of derived relational responding? The Behavior Analyst, 20, 3–9.
Lipkens, G., Hayes, S. C., & Hayes, L. J. (1993). Longitudinal study of derived stimulus relations in an infant. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 56, 201–239.
Markham, R. G., & Markham, M. R. (2002). On the role of covarying functions in stimulus class formation and transfer of function. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 78, 509–528.
Marr, M. J. (1984). Conceptual approaches and issues. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 42, 353–362.
Pilgrim, C., & Galizio, M. (2000). Stimulus equivalence and units of analysis. In J. C. Leslie & D. Blackman (Eds.), Experimental and applied analysis of human behavior (pp. 111– 126). Reno, NV: Context Press.
Sidman, M. (1990). Equivalence relations: Where do they come from? In D. E. Blackman & H. Lejeune (Eds.), Behaviour analysis in theory and practice: Contributions and controversies (pp. 93–114). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sidman, M. (1994). Stimulus equivalence: A research story. Boston: Authors Cooperative.
Sidman, M. (2000). Equivalence relations and the reinforcement contingency. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74, 127–146.
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.
Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Steele, D. L., & Hayes, S. C. (1991). Stimulus equivalence and arbitrarily applicable relational responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56, 519–555.
Stewart, I., Barnes-Holmes, D., Roche, B., & Smeets, P. M. (2002). A functional-analytic model of analogy: A relational frame analysis. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 78, 375–396.
Thompson, R. K. R., Oden, D. L., & Boysen, S. T. (1997). Language-naive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) judge relations between relations in a conceptual matching-to-sample task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 23, 31–43.
Wilson, K. G., & Hayes, S. C. (1996). Resurgence of derived stimulus relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 66, 267–281.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
I thank the Stimulus Relations Lab Group at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington for many productive discussions of the issues reviewed here. Special thanks are due to Kate Bruce for her comments on this paper.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Galizio, M. On books. BEHAV ANALYST 26, 159–169 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392074
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392074