A Discrimination Analysis of Training‐structure Effects on Stimulus Equivalence Outcomes

Saunders, Richard; Green, Gina

doi:10.1901/jeab.1999.72-117

Cited by 153 publications

(194 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

144

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Recently, a discrimination analysis has been set forth to explain the differences in equivalence outcome as a function of training structure (Saunders & Green, 1999). The fundamental assumption in the analysis is that the subjects must discriminate every stimulus from every other stimulus to meet the requirements of training contingencies and to respond in accord with stimulus equivalence consistently, which indicates that subjects need to make all between-class and within-class discriminations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Equivalence Outcome in Single Subjects as a Function of Training Structure

Arntzen

Holth

2000

Psychol Rec

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies comparing groups of subjects have indicated differential probabilities of stimulus equivalence oute,ome as a function of training structure. Both one-to-many (OTM) and manyto-one (MTO) training structures seem to produce stimulus equivalence more often than a linear series training structure. The purpose of the present study was to explore whether or not corresponding differential probabilities of equivalence outcome as a function of training structure can be demonstrated in the performances ' of single subjects. In Experiment 1, equivalence outcome was tested successively following training according to each of the three training structures. All subjects responded in accord with equivalence following the OTM training structure independent of the training order, except for 1· subject who did not respond in accord with equivalence following neither of the three training structures. Furthermore, 2 subjects demonstrated individual success following both one-to-many and many-to-one training even when they did not demonstrate success following linear series training, while the reverse never happened. In Experiment 2, equivalence outcome was tested successively following training according to a many-to-one and a one-to-many training structure with both 2 and 3 classes of stimuli. The results showed that all subjects responded in accord with equivalence following the OTM training structure, while 2 subjects did not respond in accord with equivalence following the MTO training structure. In Experiment 3, equivalence outcome was tested successively following training according to a many-to-one training structure and one-to-many training structure with both 3 and 4 members in each class. In accord with the results of Arntzen and Holth (1997) the present results indicated a superiority of the oneto-many over alternative training structures as regards the . probability of an equivalence outcome. There was no difference in the probability of an equivalence outcome following one-to-many

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Equivalence Outcome in Single Subjects as a Function of Training Structure

Arntzen

Holth

2000

Psychol Rec

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some features of the logical design can retard class formation or decrease its probability, such as the number of nodes (e.g., Sidman et al, 1985;Fields et al, 1990) and the differences in the discriminations of test stimuli established by each training design (Saunders & Green, 1999). According to some theories, class formation does also depend on the verbal repertoire of participants and collateral verbal responses (e.g., Horne & lowe, 1996).…”

Section: Stimulus Control Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A training design is a set of conditional discriminations that relate each set of stimuli to at least one other set, so that all prospective class members are related, directly or indirectly. Saunders and Green (1999) analyzed three categories of training design. For example, to establish three-member classes, it is necessary to train subjects in two conditional discriminations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Topography of Responses in Conditional Discrimination Influences Formation of Equivalence Classes

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A terceira propriedade (reflexiva) é normalmente assumida nos estudos com participantes humanos (cf. Saunders & Green, 1999).…”

unclassified

Avaliação do efeito de dica semântica e da indução de significado entre estímulos abstratos aquivalentes

Bortoloti

Rose

2011

Psicol. Reflex. Crit.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumoRelações semânticas entre estímulos equivalentes foram avaliadas utilizando "tentativas de decisão léxica" e diferencial semântico. Foram utilizadas as estruturas de treino conhecidas como "um-para-muitos" e "muitos-para-um" na geração de três classes de estímulos equivalentes envolvendo cinco conjuntos de estímulos: A, B, C, D e E. Para um grupo de participantes, denominado de Grupo Um para Muitos (GUM), as relações diretamente treinadas obedeciam à estrutura AB, BC, CD e CE; um outro grupo experimental, denominado de Grupo Muitos para Um (GMU), foi treinado na estrutura DC, EC, CB e BA. Para os dois grupos, os estímulos do conjunto B eram fotografias de faces expressando emoções e os estímulos dos conjuntos A, C, D e E eram figuras abstratas. A seguir, duas figuras (já vistas ou novas) eram apresentadas em seqüência, como "dica" e "alvo", em tentativas em que o participante respondia se reconhecia ou não a figura alvo. As respostas foram mais rápidas quando dica e alvo pertenciam à mesma classe, reproduzindo com estímulos abstratos equivalentes o efeito de dica semântica. Figuras abstratas foram então avaliadas por diferencial semântico. As avaliações do GUM foram similares às avaliações das faces por um grupo controle e as avaliações do GMU não foram. Os dados sugerem que a intensidade relativa da transferência de significados entre estímulos equivalentes pode depender da direção das relações que os participantes devem estabelecer. Palavras-chave: Equivalência de estímulos; Transferência de significado; Dica semântica; Diferencial semântico. AbstractSemantic relations among equivalent stimuli were evaluated by lexical decision tasks and a semantic differential. Two training structures, known as "one-to-many" and "many-to-one", were employed in order to generate three classes of equivalent stimuli involving five sets of stimuli: A, B, C, D and E. Stimuli for set B were pictures of faces expressing emotions whereas stimuli for sets A, C, D and E were abstract pictures. For one group of participants, the One-to-many Group, the directly trained relations were AB, BC, CD and CE; for the other experimental group, the Many-to-one Group, the directly trained relations were DC, EC, CB and BA. Two pictures were then presented in sequence as "prime" and "target" in trials in which participants responded whether they recognized or not the target. Responses were faster when prime and target belonged to the same equivalent class, reproducing the semantic priming effect. Abstract pictures were then evaluated through the semantic differential. Evaluations by the One-to-many Group were similar to the evaluations of the faces made by a control group, but those made by the Many-to-one Group were not. The data suggest that the transfer of meaning among equivalent stimuli may depend on the relations which are established by the participants.

show abstract

A Discrimination Analysis of Training‐structure Effects on Stimulus Equivalence Outcomes

Cited by 153 publications

References 54 publications

Equivalence Outcome in Single Subjects as a Function of Training Structure

Equivalence Outcome in Single Subjects as a Function of Training Structure

Topography of Responses in Conditional Discrimination Influences Formation of Equivalence Classes

Avaliação do efeito de dica semântica e da indução de significado entre estímulos abstratos aquivalentes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About