Abstract
Earlier studies have shown divergent results concerning the use of familiar picture stimuli in demonstration of equivalence. In the current experiment, we trained 16 children to form three 3-member classes in a many-to-one training structure. Half of the participants were exposed first to a condition with all abstract stimuli and then to a condition with new abstract stimuli as samples and 3 picture stimuli as comparisons (and nodes). The other participants were given the 2 conditions in the reverse order. The results, regardless of order, showed that the condition with picture stimuli as nodes was more effective in producing responding in accord with equivalence than stimulus sets with abstract stimuli only. In addition, more participants responded in accord with equivalence when they were trained with picture stimuli first. Reaction time to the comparison stimuli showed a greater increase with abstract stimuli than with pictures as nodes.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
ANNETT, J. M., & LESLIE, J. C. (1995). Stimulus classes involving olfactory stimuli. The Psychological Record, 45, 439–450.
ARNTZEN, E. (2004). Probability of equivalence formation: Familiar stimuli and training sequence. The Psychological Record, 54, 275–291.
ARNTZEN, E. (2006). Delayed matching to sample and stimulus equivalence: Probability of responding in accord with equivalence as a function of different delays. The Psychological Record, 56, 135–167.
ARNTZEN, E., GALAEN, T., & HALVORSEN, L. R. (2007). Different retention intervals in delayed matching-to-sample: Effects of responding in accord with equivalence. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 8, 177–191.
ARNTZEN, E., GRONDAHL, T., & EILIFSEN, C. (2010). The effects of different training structures in the establishment of conditional discriminations and the subsequent performance on the tests for stimulus equivalence. The Psychological Record, 60, 437–462.
ARNTZEN, E., HALSTADTRO, L. B., BJERKE, E., & HALSTADTRO, M. (2010). Training and testing theoretical music skills in a boy with autism using a matching-to-sample format. Behavioral Interventions, 25, 129–143. doi: 10.1002/bin.301
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.
ARNTZEN, E., VAIDYA, M., & HALSTADTRO, L. B. (2008). On the role of instruction in conditional discrimination training. Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin, 29, 17–24.
BELANICH, J., & FIELDS, L. (1999). Tactual equivalence class formation and tactual-to-visual cross-modal transfer. The Psychological Record, 49, 75–91.
BENTALL, R. P., DICKINS, D. W., & FOX, S. R. A. (1993). Naming and equivalence: Response latencies for emergent relations. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 46B. 187–214.
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.
BOELENS, H. (2002). Studying stimulus equivalence: Defense of the two-choice procedure. The Psychological Record, 52, 305–314.
CARRIGAN, P. R., & 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.
CAUTILLI, J. D., HANCOCK, M. A., THOMAS, C. A., & TILLMAN, C. (2002). Behavior therapy and autism: Issues in diagnosis and treatment. The Behavior Analyst Today, 3, 112–125.
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.
DUGDALE, N., & LOWE, C. F. (2000). Testing for symmetry in the conditional discriminations of language-trained chimpanzees. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 73, 5–22.
DYMOND, S., & REHFELDT, R. A. (2001). Supplemental measures and derived stimulus relations. Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin, 19, 8–12.
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.
FIELDS, L., REEVE, K. R., ROSEN, D., VARELAS, A., ADAMS, B. J., BELANICH, J., ET AL. (1997). Using the simultaneous protocol to study equivalence class formation: The facilitating effects of nodal number and size of previously established equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 67, 367–389.
FIELDS, L., & VERHAVE, T. (1987). The structure of equivalence classes. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 48, 317–332.
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.
HAYES, L. J., TILLEY, K. L., & HAYES, S. C. (1988). Extending equivalence and membership to gustatory stimuli. The Psychological Record, 38, 473–482.
HAYES, S. C., & BISSETT, R. T. (1998). Derived stimulus relations produce mediated and episodic priming. The Psychological Record, 48, 617–630.
HOLTH, P., & ARNTZEN, E. (1998a). Stimulus familiarity and the delayed emergence of stimulus equivalence or consistent nonequivalence. The Psychological Record, 48, 81–110.
HOLTH, P., & ARNTZEN, E. (1998b). Symmetry versus sequentiality related to prior training, sequential dependency of stimuli, and verbal labeling. The Psychological Record, 48, 293–315.
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.
HORNE, P. J., & LOWE, C. F. (1996). On the origins of naming and other symbolic behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 181–241.
LEBLANC, L. A., MIGUEL, C. R., CUMMINGS, A. R., GOLDSMITH, T. R., & CARR, J. E. (2003). The effects of three stimulus-equivalence testing conditions on emergent Us geography relations of children diagnosed with autism. Behavioral Interventions, 18, 279–289.
LESLIE, J. C., TIERNEY, K. J., ROBINSON, C. P., KEENAN, M., & WATT, A. (1993). Differences between clinically anxious and non-anxious subjects in a stimulus equivalence training task involving threat works. The Psychological Record, 43, 153–161.
LIPKINS, R., HAYES, S. C., & HAYES, L. J. (1993). Longitudinal study of the development of derived relations in an infant. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 56, 201–239.
LYDDY, R., BARNES-HOLMES, D., & HAMPSON, P. J. (2000). The effect of stimulus meaningfulness on the formation of equvialence classes. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 1, 71–87.
MANDELL, C. (1997). Stimulus equivalence and meaning: The influence of verbal behavior. In C. Mandell & A. McCabe (Eds.). The problem of meaning: Behavioral and cognitive perspectives (pp. 81–116). New York: Elsevier Science.
MANDELL, C., & SHEEN, V. (1994). Equivalence class formation as a function of the pronounceability of the sample stimulus. Behavioural Processes, 32, 29–46.
MEYER, D. E., & SCHVANEVELDT, R. W. (1971). Facilitation in recognition pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90, 227–234.
O’LEARY, C. A., & BUSH, K. M. (1996). Stimulus equivalence in the tactile modality. The Psychological Record, 46, 509–517.
PILGRIM, C., CHAMBERS, L., & GALIZIO, M. (1995). Reversal of baseline relations and stimulus equivalence: Ii. Children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 63, 225–238.
PLAUD, J. J. (1995). The formation of stimulus equivalences: Fear-relevant versus fear-irrelevant stimulus classes. The Psychological Record, 45, 207–222.
RANDELL, T., & REMINGTON, B. (1999). Equivalence relations between visual stimuli: The functional role of naming. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71, 395–415.
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.
SIDMAN, M. (1987). Two choices are not enough. Behavior Analysis, 22, 11–18.
SIDMAN, M. (1992). Equivalence relations: Some basic considerations. In S. C. Hayes & L. J. Hayes (Eds.). Understanding verbal relations (pp. 15–27). Reno, NV: Context Press.
SIDMAN, M. (1994). Equivalence relations and behavior: 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.
SMEETS, P. M., & BARNES-HOLMES, D. (2005). Establishing equivalence classes in preschool children with one-to-many and many-to-one training protocols. Behavioural Processes, 69, 281–293.
SPENCER, T. J., & CHASE, P. N. (1996). Speed analysis of stimulus equivalence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 643–659.
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.
STROMER, R., MACKAY, H. A., & STODDARD, L. T. (1992). Classroom applications of stimulus equivalence technology. Journal of Behavioral Education, 2, 225–256.
TOMANARI, G. Y., SIDMAN, M., RUBIO, A. R., & DUBE, W. V. (2006). Equivalence classes with requirements for short response latencies. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 85, 349–369.
WILKINSON, K. M., & MCILVANE, W. J. (2001). Methods for studying symbolic behavior and category formation: Contributions of stimulus equivalence research. Developmental Review, 21, 355–374.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The authors are very grateful to Dag-Erik Eilertsen for help with the statistical analyses and to Lill-Beathe Halstadtro for assistance in organizing the lab facilities in one of the laboratories. Furthermore, we want to thank three anonymous reviewers and David Dickins for valuable comments to earlier versions of the article.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Arntzen, E., Lian, T. Trained and Derived Relations with Pictures Versus Abstract Stimuli As Nodes. Psychol Rec 60, 659–678 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395738
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395738