Two studies investigated the transfer of respondent elicitation through equivalence classes. In Experiment 1, match-to-sample procedures were used to teach 8 subjects two four-member equivalence classes. One member of one class was then paired with electric shock, and one member of the other class was presented without shock. All remaining stimuli were then presented. Using skin conductance as the measure of conditioning, transfer of conditioning was demonstrated in 6 of the 8 subjects. In Experiment 2, similar procedures were used to replicate the results of Experiment 1 and investigate the transfer of extinction. Following equivalence training and conditioning to all members of one class, one member was then presented in extinction. When the remaining stimuli from this class were then presented, they failed to elicit skin conductance. In the final phase of the experiment, the stimulus that was previously presented in extinction was reconditioned. Test trials with other members of the class revealed that they regained elicitation function. These results demonstrate that both respondent elicitation and extinction can transfer through stimulus classes. The clinical and applied significance of the results is discussed.Key words: stimulus equivalence, transfer of function, classical conditioning, extinction, skin conductance, fear, humans Stimulus equivalence has attracted a good deal of interest recently among behavior-analytic researchers. Much of the interest stems from the contention that stimulus equivalence may provide the basis for a behavior-analytic account of symbolic behavior, language, and apparently novel behavior (e.g

In three experiments, match-to-sample procedures were used with undergraduates to establish arbitrary relational functions for three abstract visual stimuli. In the presence of samples A, B, and C, participants were trained to select the smallest, middle, and largest member, respectively, of a series of three-comparison arrays. In Experiment 1, the B (choose middle) stimulus was then used to train a steady rate of keyboard pressing before the A (choose smallest) and the C (choose largest) stimuli were presented. Participants pressed slower to A and faster to C than to B. Then B was paired with mild shock in a Pavlovian procedure with skin conductance change as the dependent variable. When presented with A and C, 6 of 8 experimental participants showed smaller skin conductance changes to A and larger skin conductance changes to C than to B. In Experiment 2, A was then used as a sample in a match-to-sample procedure to establish an arbitrary size ranking among four same-sized colored circle comparisons. One of the middle circles was then used to establish a steady rate of pressing before the other circles were presented. Five of 6 participants responded slower to the "smaller" circle and faster to the "larger" circle than they did to the "middle" circle. In Experiment 3, A, B, and C were then presented on a series of test trials requiring participants to pick the comparison that was less than, greater than, or equal to the sample. Novel stimuli were included on some trials. Results indicated that the relational training procedures produced derived relations among the stimuli used in training and that these allowed correct inferences of relative size ranking among novel stimuli.

No abstract

In two equivalence experiments, a "think aloud" procedure modeled after Ericsson and Simon's (1980) protocol analysis was implemented to examine subjects' covert verbal responses during matching to sample. The purpose was to identify variables that might explain individual differences in equivalence class formation. The results from Experiment 1 suggested that subjects who formed equivalence classes described the relations among stimuli, whereas those not showing equivalence described sample and comparison stimuli as unitary compounds. Because Experiment 1 only demonstrated a correlation between describing stimulus compounds and the absence of equivalence classes, a second study was conducted. In Experiment 2, equivalence class formation was brought under experimental control through pretraining manipulations that facilitated responding either to stimulus compounds or to relations among stimuli. The results demonstrated that a history of describing stimulus compounds, when compared with describing the relations among the stimuli, interfered with the emergence of stimulus equivalence. These findings clarify individual differences in stimulus equivalence. They also demonstrate the utility of analyzing verbal reports to identify possible variables that can be manipulated experimentally.

This study investigated the relationship between measured levels of masculinity-femininity, social desirability, and responsivity to pain in men and women. The literature suggests that the two personality variables might provide an explanation for the common findings of higher pain thresholds and tolerances in men than in women. A significant interaction was found between masculinity-femininity and sex for pain thresholds. Analysis of this interaction indicated that for men, but not women, there was a significant correlation between masculinity-femininity and pain, where higher masculinity was associated with higher pain thresholds. However, this finding did not account for the sex difference in pain threshold. The sex of the subject remained a significant predictor of both pain thresholds and tolerances after allowing for the influence of masculinity-femininity, social desirability, and their associated interactions.