Meaningful Stimuli and the Enhancement of Equivalence Class Formation

Abstract

Stimulus meaningfulness has been defined by its hedonic valence, denotative (definitional) and connotative (evaluative) properties, and its influence on forming categories called equivalence classes. Positive or negative hedonic value of a meaningful stimulus transfers to the other members of an equivalence class that contains such a stimulus, and also influences likelihood of class formation. The denotative and connotative properties of meaningful stimuli are instantiated by the responses they produced (simple discriminative functions) and by the selection of other related words (conditional discriminative functions). If a meaningless cue acquires one such stimulus control function, and is included in a set of otherwise meaningless stimuli, its inclusion enhances the formation of an equivalence class. These results suggest ways to enhance equivalence class formation in applied settings. When degree of enhancement matches that produced by the inclusion of a meaningful stimulus in a class, class enhancement can be accounted for by the stimulus control functions it serves, as well as its hedonic, denotative, and connotative properties. We also linked equivalence class formation and meaningfulness to semantic networks, relational frame theory, verbal behavior, and naming.

On the effectiveness of including meaningful pictures in the formation of equivalence classes

“…Fields and Arntzen () mentioned different properties that are characteristic for meaningful stimuli—hedonic valence, denotative (definitional) and connotative (evaluative) features. As pointed out in the introduction, different experiments have shown how meaningful stimuli that acquired stimulus control functions (discriminative and conditional stimuli) can influence equivalence class formation.…”

“…A recent line of research has explored the effects of including familiar color pictures as one of the stimuli in each potential class to model or mimic meaningfulness in a laboratory setting (Arntzen & Nartey, ; Arntzen, Nartey, & Fields, , , , ; Fields, Arntzen, Nartey, & Eilifsen, ; Mensah & Arntzen, ; Nartey, Arntzen, & Fields, , , ; Nedelcu, Fields, & Arntzen, ; Travis, Fields, & Arntzen, ; see also an overview in Fields & Arntzen, ). The common procedure in these experiments is to train adult participants on 12 conditional discriminations using a linear series (LS) training structure (A➔B➔C➔D➔E) and test for the formation of three 5‐member equivalence classes.…”

Emotional Faces in Symbolic Relations: A Happiness Superiority Effect Involving the Equivalence Paradigm

“…Recent research has shown that the inclusion of a pre-experimental meaningful stimulus in an equivalence training influences likelihood of class formation (Fields et al, 2012; Fields and Arntzen, 2018) and also influences the relational strength within the class (Bortoloti and de Rose, 2012). A number of studies that established equivalence classes comprised of arbitrary stimuli and pictures of faces expressing emotions have found that valences of the faces affect the relatedness of equivalent stimuli.…”

Neurophysiological Effects Associated With Subliminal Conditioning of Appetite Motivations

“…Our framework posits that (i) motivational states, like hunger, can be significantly modulated through the construction and integration of self-generated emotionally salient narratives ( Peterson, 2002 ; also see Van Vugt et al, 2018 ), (ii) the representational content from which self-narratives are constructed is a function of externally available relational information and earlier learning histories ( Osgood, 1980 ; Bar-Anan and Moran, 2017 ; Fields and Arntzen, 2018 ), and (iii) external valence information can be encoded without a perceiver’s complete awareness of the valence-specifying stimulus/relation perceived ( Kouider et al, 2010 ). We found physiological evidence in support of this hypothesis, given that observed physiological effects incorporated semantic and motor regions ( Boulenger et al, 2008 ).…”