Classroom applications of stimulus equivalence technology

We review basic concepts and methods of stimulus equivalence research and suggest applications in teaching rudimentary language arts skills in the classroom. We describe methods of establishing equivalence-based networks of matching-to-sample, writing, and naming performances. The methods may be used as a supplement to classroom instruction to assess whether standard curriculum-based approaches establish such integrated networks. Methods derived from equivalence research may be useful for remediation when traditional teaching approaches fail. Recent research suggests that direct focus on spelling performances may be required if entire networks of language arts skills are to be acquired. In addition, the equivalence relations themselves may require concentrated teaching in some children.     

SPELLING AND EMERGENT PICTURE-PRINTED WORD RELATIONS ESTABLISHED WITH DELAYED IDENTITY MATCHING TO COMPLEX SAMPLES

Students with academic deficits learned delayed matching-to-sample tasks that used complex sample stimuli, each consisting of a picture and a printed word. A touch to the sample complex removed it from the computer display and produced either picture comparisons or a choice pool of letters. If the comparisons were pictures, selecting the picture identical to the preceding sample was reinforced. If the letters appeared, letter-by-letter construction of the preceding printed word sample was reinforced. The procedure engendered new constructed-response spelling performances and arbitrary relations among pictures and printed words in matching to sample. The emergence of relations among different sets of printed words (paired with the same pictures) suggested classes of equivalent stimuli. Outcome tests involving spoken words as sample stimuli suggested expansion of subjects' spelling repertoires and stimulus classes.     

Delayed constructed-response identity matching improves the spelling performance of students with mental retardation

We assessed the effects of a computerized matching-to-sample procedure on the spelling performances of three students with mental retardation. Initially, the students could 1) match pictures and printed words to one another, and 2) match pictures and printed words to spoken words. However, they could not construct words to either pictures or spoken words (e.g., touch, in order, the letters s->h->o->e given the spoken-word sample Shoe). Word constructions then improved markedly after exposure to delayed constructed-response identity matching (e.g., touch the letters s->h->o->e given the printed-word sample shoe). One subject's oral and written spelling also improved. The results extend previous research by showing multiple positive effects of a computerized spelling intervention. These effects may have occurred in part because of the formation of stimulus classes among pictures, printed words, and spoken words.     

CONDITIONAL DISCRIMINATION VS. MATCHING TO SAMPLE: AN EXPANSION OF THE TESTING PARADIGM

A subject's performance under a conditional-discrimination procedure defines conditional relations between stimuli: “If A1, then B1; if A2, then B2.” The procedure may also generate matching to sample. If so, the stimuli will be related not only by conditionality, but by equivalence: A1 and B1 will become equivalent members of one stimulus class, A2 and B2 of another. One paradigm for testing whether a conditional-discrimination procedure has generated equivalence relations uses three sets of stimuli, A, B, and C, three stimuli per set. Subjects learn to select Set-B and Set-C comparisons conditionally upon Set-A samples. Having been explicitly taught six sample-comparison relations, A1B1, A1C1, A2B2, A2C2, A3B3, and A3C3, subjects prove immediately capable of matching the B- and C-stimuli; six new relations emerge (B1C1, B2C2, B3C3, C1B1, C2B2, C3B3). The 12 stimulus relations, six taught and six emergent, define the existence of three three-member stimulus classes, A1B1C1, A2B2C2, and A3B3C3. This paradigm was expanded by introducing three more stimuli (Set D), and teaching eight children not only the AB and AC relations but DC relations also—selecting Set-C comparisons conditionally upon Set-D samples. Six of the children proved immediately capable of matching the B- and D-stimuli to each other. By selecting appropriate Set-B comparisons conditionally upon Set-D samples, and Set-D comparisons conditionally upon Set-B samples, they demonstrated the existence of three four-member stimulus classes, A1B1C1D1, A2B2C2D2, and A3B3C3D3. These larger classes were confirmed by the subjects' success with the prerequisite lower-level conditional relations; they were also able to select Set-D comparisons conditionally upon samples from Sets A and C, and to do the BC and CB matching that defined the original three-member classes. Adding the three DC relations therefore generated 12 more, three each in BD, DB, AD, and CD. Enlarging each class by one member brought about a disproportionate increase in the number of emergent relations. Ancillary oral naming tests suggested that the subject's application of the same name to each stimulus was neither necessary nor sufficient to establish classes of equivalent stimuli.     

The development of derived stimulus relations through training in arbitrary-matching sequences

Five-year-old children were taught three-stage sequences of arbitrary matching: A-C, B-C, A-D; A-C, B-D, B-C; or A-C, A-D, B-C. Each stage refers to a sample-comparison relation between stimuli. Unreinforced test probes revealed untrained arbitrary matches (B-D, A-D, and B-D, respectively), derivable by substitution of stimuli with a common sample or comparison function. Additional probes revealed further untrained sample-comparison relations derivable by substitution and identity, including the commuted relations D-B, D-A, and D-B, respectively. These processes may have relevance to conceptual and verbal behavior.     

Extending sequence-class membership with matching to sample

Three normal adults were first trained to point sequentially to each member of several pairs of visual stimuli. This baseline training established one class of stimuli to which subjects responded first, and another class of stimuli to which they responded second. Then, in a matching-to-sample procedure, baseline-sequence stimuli served as samples and new visual stimuli served as comparisons. Subjects were trained to choose one group of new comparisons when the sample was a "first" stimulus from the sequence baseline, and to choose the other new comparison stimuli when the sample was a "second" from the sequence baseline. When the new stimuli were then presented as pairs in the posttest, two subjects pointed to them in sequences predictable on the basis of the stimulus-class membership established during matching to sample. The failure of one subject to demonstrate sequential transfer was shown to be a consequence of the failure of the matching-to-sample procedure to establish stimulus classes. The production of sequences that were not directly trained suggested an empirical approach to the analysis of simple grammatical behavior.     

A search for symmetry in the conditional discriminations of rhesus monkeys, baboons, and children.

Procedures for generating arbitrary matching-to-sample performances may generate only conditional discriminations. Rational grounds for this distinction are proposed, based on the properties that any equivalence relation must possess. Empirical tests are described for determining whether subjects trained on conditional discriminations are also engaged in true matching to sample. A series of studies than leads to the conclusion that proof of true matching to sample by monkeys, pigeons, or baboons is yet to be provided. Whether the absence of such proof reflects experiential factors or species-defined limitations is not presently clear.     

The transfer of specific and general consequential functions through simple and conditional equivalence relations

The purpose of this study was to examine the transfer of consequential (reinforcement and punishment) functions through equivalence relations. In Experiment 1, 9 subjects acquired three three-member equivalence classes through matching-to-sample training using arbitrary visual forms. Comparison stimuli were then given conditioned reinforcement or punishment functions by pairing them with verbal feedback during a sorting task. For 8 of the 9 subjects, trained consequential functions transferred through their respective equivalence classes without additional training. In Experiment 2, transfer of function was initially tested before equivalence testing per se. Three of 4 subjects showed the transfer without a formal equivalence test. In Experiment 3, 3 subjects were given training that gave rise to six new three-member conditional equivalence classes. For 2 of the subjects, the same stimulus could have either a reinforcement or punishment function on the basis of contextual cues that defined its class membership. Experiment 4 assessed whether equivalence training had established general or specific consequential functions primarily by adding novel stimuli in the transfer test. Subjects treated even novel feedback stimuli in the transfer test as consequences, but the direction of consequential effects depended upon the transfer of specific consequential functions through equivalence relations.