Baseline training sequence affects speed of emergent conditional discriminations

Abstract

We examined the effects of baseline training sequence on the emergence of conditional discriminations in an intraverbal naming task. Thirty-two college students were randomly assigned to two groups. The tact-intraverbal (TI) group first learned to vocally tact eight visual stimuli using a unique verbal label for each stimulus, and then to intraverbally relate four pairs of verbal labels. The intraverbal-tact (IT) group received the same training but in the opposite sequence. Both groups then received a match-to-sample test involving the visual stimuli alone. On average, the TI group had significantly shorter reaction times than the IT group throughout all four test blocks, even when controlling for intraverbal retention, which was lower in the IT group. Accuracy on the MTS test did not differ significantly between groups when controlling for intraverbal retention. However, MTS accuracy and intraverbal retention were strongly correlated in the IT group but uncorrelated in the TI group. We suggest the effect of training sequence reflects different sources of stimulus control available to subjects in different groups when confronted with the novel MTS trials.

Training sequence effects on emergent conditional discriminations: Replication and extension to selection‐based training

“…In addition, such knowledge could assist with instructional design, for example, in the context of equivalence‐based instruction (EBI) protocols (e.g., Fienup & Critchfield, 2011). The purpose of the present study was to explore the reliability and generality of the training sequence effect reported by Petursdottir et al (2019) in the intraverbal naming task. The first experiment aimed to replicate the original study with modifications intended to improve baseline retention and MTS accuracy.…”

“…In Experiment 1, we modified the task and the training procedures in several ways from Petursdottir et al (2019). Specifically, we decreased the number of stimulus pairs from four in the previous study to three, increased the stringency of the mastery criterion for vocal baseline training, and altered the visual stimuli with the intention of making them more discriminable and reducing the likelihood of responding based on physical similarity (based on reports of some participants in the previous study).…”

“…A correct response is defined as selection of the comparison whose label was previously related to the label of the sample through intraverbal training. Children and adults typically pass this test if the trained baseline relations are retained throughout testing (Jennings & Miguel, 2017; Ma et al, 2016; Petursdottir et al, 2015; Petursdottir et al, 2019; Santos et al, 2015).…”

“…Petursdottir et al (2019) reported a sequence effect in the intraverbal naming task with college students, such that participants who received the usual version of the task (tact training before intraverbal training; TI group) had shorter reaction times (RTs) on the MTS test than participants who received the two training phases in the opposite sequence (intraverbal before tact training; IT group). The authors hypothesized this difference reflected different sources of stimulus control available to participants in MTS trials.…”

In Memoriam: Jack Michael (1926‐2020)

“…He also taught us how to be effective teachers. To those familiar with Jack's work, it is clear how his molecular approach to understanding behavioral regulation has shaped how we conduct our empirical investigations on verbal behavior, stimulus control, and derived stimulus relations (see Miguel, 2018; Petursdottir et al, 2019). We will never forget Jack's teachings or his sharp sense of humor, uninhibitedness, and most of all, his big heart.…”