Abstract
The emergence of structure from undifferentiated beginnings has long been a fundamental problem in science, in biology, the issue was one of form versus function, and in psychology psychologists struggled with how infants make sense of, and consolidate, the flood of sensory input they are faced with. Although the concept of discriminative responding has proven useful in this regard, describing the emergence of structure which sometimes follows conditional discrimination procedures as stimulus equivalence has had important implications for subsequent research in the field.
Arising from the plethora of research on stimulus equivalence, the theoretical treatises of Sidman (1994), S. C. Hayes (1994), and Horne and Lowe (1996) have distinguished themsetves quickly in a crowded field. As all three of the substantive positions appear to be developing parallel to each other, some history of the field as well as inherent shortcomings of each of the theoretical positions are discussed. Secondary theories and important new methodologies suggest where the field is or should be heading if we are to keep sight of our original goals.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
BARNES, D. (1994). Stimulus equivalence and relational frame theory. The Psychological Record, 44, 91–124.
BARNES, D. (1996). Naming as a technical term: Sacrificing behavior analysis at the altar of popularity. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 264–266.
BARNES, D., HAMPSON, P. J. (1997). Connectionist models of arbitrarily applicable relations responding: A possible role tor the hippocampal system. In J. Donahoe (Ed.), Neural network models of cognition: Biobehavioral Foundations. Advances in psychology, Vol. 121 (pp. 496–521). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishers.
BARNES, D., HOLMES, Y. (1991). Radical behaviorism, stimulus equivalence, and human cognition. The Psychological Record, 41, 19–31.
BISHOP, D. V. M., ROBSON, J. (1989). Unimpaired short-term memory and rhyme judgment in congenitally speechless individuals: Implications for the notion of “Articuiatory coding.” The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41 A, 123–140.
BOELENS, H. (1994). A traditional account of stimulus equivalence. The Psychological Record, 44, 587–605.
BUSH, K. M., SIDMAN, M., DE ROSE, T. (1989). Contextual control of emergent equivalence relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 29–45.
CATANIA, A. C. (1996). On the origins of behavior structure. In T. R. Zentail & P. M. Smeets (Eds.), Stimulus class formation in humans and animals (pp. 3–12). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
COWLEY, B. J., GREEN, G., BRAUNLING-MCMORROW, D. (1992). Using stimulus equivalence procedures to teach name-face matching to adults with brain injuries. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 461–475.
DE ROSE, J. C., DE SOUZA, D. G., ROSSITO, A. L., DE ROSE, T. M. S. (1992). Stimulus equivalence and generalization in reading after matching to sample by exclusion. In S. C. Hayes & L. J. Hayes (Eds.), Understanding verbal relations (pp. 68–82). Reno, NV: Context Press.
DEVANY, J. M., HAYES, S. C., NELSON, R. O. (1986). Equivalence class formation in language-able and language-disabled children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 46, 243–257.
DOUGHER, M. J., MARKHAM, M. R. (1994). Stimulus equivalence, functional equivalence and the transfer of function. In S. C. Hayes, L. J. Hayes, M. Sato., & K. Ono (Eds.), Behavior analysis of language and cognition. Reno, NV: Context Press.
DUGDALE, N. (1996). Naming, stimulus equivalence, and conditioned hearing. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65(1), 272–274.
DUGDALE, N., LOWE, C. F. (1990), Naming and stimulus equivalence. In D. E. Blackman & H. LeJeune (Eds.), Behaviour analysis in theory and practice: Contributions and controversies. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
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.
EIKESETH, S., SMITH, T. (1992). The development of functional and equivalence classes in high-functioning autistic children: The role of naming. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 58, 123–133.
EPSTEIN, R. (1985). The spontaneous interconnection of three repertories. The Psychological Record, 35, 131–141.
GOULD, S. J. (1977). Ontogeny and phytogeny. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
GREEN, G., STROMER, R., MACKAY, H. A. (1993). Relational learning in stimulus sequences. The Psychological Record, 43, 599–615.
GREY, I. M., BARNES, D. (1996). Stimulus equivalence and attitudes. The Psychological Record, 46, 243–270.
HAYES, L. J. (1992). Equivalence as process. In S. C. Hayes & L. J. Hayes (Eds.), Understanding verbal relations. Reno, NV: Context Press.
HAYES, L. J. (1996). Listening with understanding and speaking with meaning. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 282–283
HAYES, S. C. (1989). Nonhumans have not yet shown stimulus equivalence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 385–392.
HAYES, S. C. (1991). A relation 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. (1994). Relational frame theory: A functional approach to verbal events. In S. C. Hayes, L. J. Hayes, M. Sato., & K. Ono (Eds.), Behavior analysis of language and cognition. Reno, NV: Context Press.
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(2), 235–244.
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. New York: Plenum Press.
HAYES, S. C., HAYES, L. J. (1992). Verbal relations and the evolution of behavior analysis. American Psychologist, 47(11), 1383–1395.
HORNE, R J., LOWE, C. F. (1996). On the origins of naming and other symbolic behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 185–241.
JAMES, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. (Vol. 1). New York: Holt.
KANTOR, J. R. (1959). Interbehavioral psychology: A sample of scientific system construction. Granville, Oh: The Principia Press.
KANTOR, J. R. (1977). Psychological linguistics. Chicago, II: The Principia Press.
LIPKENS, R. (1992). A behavioral analysis of complex human functioning: Analogical reasoning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Nevada.
LOWE, C. F., BEASTY, A. (1987). Language and the emergence of equivalence relations: A developmental study. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 40, A42.
LOWE, C. F., HORNE, P. J. (1996). Reflections on naming and other symbolic behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 315–340.
MACE, C. F. (1996). In pursuit of general behavioral relations. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29(4), 557–563.
MARKHAM, M. R., DOUGHER, M. J. (1993). Compound stimuli in emergent stimulus relations: Extending the scope of stimulus equivalence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 60, 529–542.
MATOS, M. A., & HUBNER-D’OLIVEIRA, M. M. (1992). Equivalence relations and reading. In S. C. Hayes & L. J. Hayes (Eds.), Understanding verbal relations (pp. 83–96). Reno, NV: Context Press.
MCILVANE, W. J., DUBE, W. V. (1990). Do stimulus classes exist before they are tested? The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 8, 13–17.
NEVIN, J. A. (1995). Behavioral economics and behavioral momentum. Special Issue: Behavioral economics. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 64(3), 385–395.
PARROTT, L J. (1984). Listening and understanding. The Behavior Analyst, 7, 29–39.
ROCHE, B., BARNES, D. (1996). Arbitrarily applicable relational responding and sexual categorization: A critical test oi the derived difference relation. The Psychological Record, 46, 451–476.
SAUNDERS, R. R., GREEN, G. (1992). The nonequivalence of behavioral and mathematical equivalence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 57, 227–241.
SCHUSTERMAN, R. J., KASTAK, D. (1993). A California sea lion (Zalophus californianus) is capable of forming equivalence relations. The Psychological Record, 43, 823–839.
SIDMAN, M. (1971), Reading and auditory-visual equivalences. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 14, 5–13.
SIDMAN, M. (1986). Functional analysis of emergent stimulus classes. In T. Thompson & M. D., Zeiler (Eds.), Analysis and integration of behavioral units (pp. 213–245). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
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. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
SIDMAN, M. (1992). Equivalence relations: Some basic considerations. In S. C. Hayes & L. J. Hayes (Eds.), Understanding verbal relations. Reno, NV: Context Press
SIDMAN, M. (1994). Equivalence relations and behavior: A research story. Boston, MA: Authors Cooperative Inc.
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. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: The Free Press.
SKINNER, B. R (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
SKINNER, B. F. (1963). Behaviorism at fifty. Science, 140, 951–958.
STEELE, D. L., HAYES, S. C. (1991). Stimulus equivalence and arbitrarily applicable relational responding. Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56, 519–555.
STEMMER, N. (1995). Do we need an alternative theory of verbal behavior?: A reply to Hayes and Wilson. The Behavior Analyst, 18, 357–362.
VYGOTSKY, L. S. (1978). Mind in science: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
YAMAMOTO, J., & ASANO, T. (1995). Stimulus equivalence in a chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). The Psychological Record, 45, 3–21.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This paper was written in partial fulfillment of Michael Clayton’s doctoral degree requirement under supervision of Linda J. Hayes.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Clayton, M.C., Hayes, L.J. Conceptual Differences in the Analysis of Stimulus Equivalence. Psychol Rec 49, 145–161 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395312
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395312