Controlling Relations in Stimulus Equivalence Classes of Preschool Children and Individuals with Down Syndrome

Grisante, Priscila Crespilho; Rose, Júlio C. de; McIlvane, William J.

doi:10.1007/s40732-014-0021-3

Cited by 15 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…What is particularly relevant for people with developmental disabilities, and for our study, is that they show more variability and difficulties in learning both baseline and derived stimulus relations, as expressed through the number of training trials required to master criteria and the accuracy during tests of equivalence (Grisante et al, 2014;O'Donnell & Saunders, 2003;Tovar & Westermann, 2017). Some authors have suggested that problems with deriving correct stimulus relations are correlated with poor language development (Devany et al, 1986).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Teaching Symbolic Relations in Down Syndrome Through Equivalence-Based Instruction: A Case Study

Tovar¹,

Torres-Chávez²

2021

RMAC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A procedure for establishing equivalence classes in a participant with Down syndrome was implemented. The classes were composed of written words (A), pictorial representations (B), digit numbers (C), and auditory words (D) representing metro stations. In the training phase we implemented a successful procedure for enhancing perceptual discrimination of written words when presented as sample stimuli (A), and we established a reduced number of stimulus relations: AB, BC, DA, from which the participant was able to derive full stimulus classes that included derived relations between stimuli that had not 1.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Teaching Symbolic Relations in Down Syndrome Through Equivalence-Based Instruction: A Case Study

Tovar¹,

Torres-Chávez²

2021

RMAC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All six participants formed equivalence classes with digital photos. Given the participants' ages (about 4 years old), equivalence class formation with digital photos might be expected based on previous research (e.g., Grisante, de Rose, & McIlvane, ). However, generalized equivalence responding had not been previously investigated in behavior analytic research with children of this age.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Generalization of equivalence relations from photos to objects by preschool children

Ayres‐Pereira

Canovas

Varella

et al. 2018

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Generalized equivalence classes are stimulus classes that consist of equivalent stimuli and other physically similar class-member stimuli. The present study evaluated whether preschool children would form equivalence classes among photos of abstract objects (2D) and show equivalence generalization to the corresponding objects (3D), printed photos (2D stimuli), and to black-and-white drawn pictures (2D stimuli). Six typically developing children were taught arbitrary relations to establish three 3-member equivalence classes with 2D stimuli presented on a computer screen. AB-AC baseline relations (for half of the participants) and AB-BC relations (for the other half) were taught using a multiple-probe design to assess taught and tested relations. After class formation, three types of generalization probes were conducted: generalization to 3D stimuli, generalization between 2D (printed photos) and 3D stimuli, and generalization to drawn pictures (2D). All of the participants formed the equivalence classes. Two participants met the criterion for all three generalization probe types. Two participants presented mixed results across tests, and two participants did not exhibit equivalence generalization. The results demonstrated equivalence generalization from 2D to 3D stimuli in preschool children, although the variability across participants suggests that such generalization cannot be assumed a priori.

show abstract

“…Had the pigeons done so (they did not), then the authors would have termed this outcome S‐delta control—a reject relation using more recent terminology. Most subsequent studies that have addressed select and/or reject controlling relations have adopted the “novel” stimulus substitution method (e.g., Grisante et al, 2014; Johnson & Sidman, 1993; Scienza et al, 2019; Stromer & Osborne, 1982), and most researchers seem to have followed the advice of Carrigan and Sidman (1992) who suggested the use of novel stimuli for purposes of testing for sample‐S‐ relations and potentially biasing participants toward their acquisition. However, other contemporaneous work (e.g., Dixon et al, 1983; McIlvane et al, 1984) pointed out that novel stimuli were not necessarily neutral in valence and could exhibit stimulus control properties that might render them unsuitable in conducting precise tests of select and reject controlling relations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effective use of the blank comparison procedure in simple discrimination by infant capuchin monkeys: A methodological note

Jiménez

Brino

Goulart

et al. 2021

J Exper Analysis Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In studies of simple and conditional discrimination, procedures are needed to measure those aspects of stimuli that control behavior. The blank comparison procedure is one such procedure. It was designed explicitly for assessing S+ and S‐ functions when discriminative stimuli are presented simultaneously. In this procedure, a neutral stimulus serves sometimes as S+ and sometimes as S‐. Its discriminative function is defined in relation to other stimuli in the display. The present study aimed to prepare 2 infant female capuchin monkeys for the effective use of the blank comparison procedure in a simple discrimination task. First, simple discrimination training was applied up to a stable accuracy criterion of ≥90%. This training was followed by the replacement of S+ and then of S‐ stimuli with new stimuli. Ultimately, trials with the blank comparison were introduced. Following this sequence, both monkeys immediately displayed highly accurate blank‐comparison performances without the need for stimulus control shaping or other preparatory discrimination training. Thus, this procedure sequence may be an efficient, effective method for establishing blank‐comparison baselines for experimental analyses of S+/S‐ discriminative functions and perhaps for other applications in teaching simple and conditional discrimination performances to this species and others.

show abstract

Controlling Relations in Stimulus Equivalence Classes of Preschool Children and Individuals with Down Syndrome

Cited by 15 publications

References 39 publications

Teaching Symbolic Relations in Down Syndrome Through Equivalence-Based Instruction: A Case Study

Teaching Symbolic Relations in Down Syndrome Through Equivalence-Based Instruction: A Case Study

Generalization of equivalence relations from photos to objects by preschool children

Effective use of the blank comparison procedure in simple discrimination by infant capuchin monkeys: A methodological note

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About