Equivalence class formation as a function of preliminary training with pictorial stimuli

The present experiment investigated the effects of preliminary training with pictorial stimuli on the subsequent formation of three 5‐member equivalence classes (A?B?C?D?E) in 84 university students assigned to seven groups of 12. In the Abstract (ABS) group, all stimuli were abstract shapes. In the Picture (PIC) group, the C stimuli were pictures, and the remaining stimuli were the same abstract shapes as in the ABS group. For the remaining five groups, all stimuli were the same abstract shapes as in the ABS group. However, across groups, preliminary training involved either the establishment of conditional relations with simultaneous (SMTS) or delayed (DMTS) matching‐to‐sample with 0 s, 3 s, 6 s, or 9 s between the abstract C stimuli and the meaningful pictures. For the ABS and the PIC groups, 16.7% and 83.3% of participants formed classes, respectively. Preliminary training with SMTS and DMTS with 0 s, 3 s, and 6 s produced a linear increase in the likelihood of equivalence class formation, 41.7%, 50%, and 75%, respectively. Increasing the duration of delay further from 6 s to 9 s produced a substantial decline, 50%. This experiment extends knowledge about how including meaningful pictures enhances equivalence class formation.     

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

In three experiments, 165 adult participants were trained on 12 baseline conditional discriminations and tested for the formation of three 5-member equivalence classes (A➔B➔C➔D➔E). All experiments included two reference groups; the abstract (ABS) group was trained with all abstract stimuli and the picture (PIC) group with C-stimuli as meaningful pictorial stimuli but A, B, D, and E stimuli as abstract shapes. In Experiment 1, the color of the meaningful stimuli was manipulated. In the ABS, PIC, and black-and-white groups, 33.3%, 80%, and 93.3% formed equivalence classes, respectively. In Experiment 2, participants were exposed to a test block with and without trials that included C stimuli. For the groups with and without C trials in the test, 93.3% and 86.7% formed equivalence classes, respectively, compared to 20% in the ABS group. In Experiment 3, the number of meaningful pictures and their location in stimulus classes were manipulated. One group was trained with 3 pictures (C1/B2/D3, the 3-PIC) while the other groups had 2 pictures (C1/B2 and C1/D3, the 2-PIC). In the second test block for the ABS and PIC groups, 6.7% and 86% of the participants formed equivalence classes, respectively. For the 3-PIC and the 2-PIC groups, 66.7% and 50% of the participants formed equivalence classes, respectively. Results suggest that the effects of meaningful stimuli in equivalence classes (a) cannot be attributed to the use of colorful stimuli in previous studies, (b) occur during training and are not dependent on the presence of meaningful stimuli at test, and (c) are sensitive to stimulus location.     

Effects of preliminary class membership on subsequent stimulus equivalence class formation

The present study examined the effects of including stimuli previously trained as members of functional classes or equivalence classes on subsequent equivalence class formation, and isolated the effects of preliminary training from those of the acquired function stimuli. Fifty-six adults were assigned to 1 of 5 conditions. The control group (CONT) received no preliminary training prior to the terminal phase. Participants in the other 4 groups learned two 3-member functional classes and two 3-member equivalence classes during the preliminary phase. The terminal equivalence phase trained two 5-member classes (A → B → C → D → E) comprising abstract forms; the C stimuli in the terminal phase were (a) from the preliminary functional classes for 1 group (ACQ-F), (b) from the preliminary equivalence classes for the second experimental group (ACQ-E), (c) pictures of everyday objects for the picture control group (PIC), and (d) novel, unfamiliar stimuli for the preliminary training control group (PRE-CONT). Class formation yields were 100% in the PIC condition and 11% in the CONT condition; however, low yields in the PRE-CONT, ACQ-F, and ACQ-E conditions were unexpected, suggesting that procedural variables in preliminary training account for more of the subsequent effects on class formation than the stimulus control properties of the acquired function stimuli.     

Establishing auditory stimulus control over an eight-member equivalence class via conditional discrimination procedures

Two eight-member equivalence classes of visual stimuli were established during three phases of a training program. In Phase 1, two training arrangements were compared. In one, 3 subjects were taught on different trials to select from a single pair of comparison stimuli (A1, A2) in response to eight sample stimuli that were trained in pairs (B1, B2; C1, C2; D1, D2; E1, E2). In the second arrangement, subjects were taught to select from four pairs of comparisons (B1, B2; C1, C2; D3, D2; E2, E2) in response to two samples (A1, A2). Training with the single pair of comparison stimuli resulted in the development of equivalence relations (B1C1, B2C2, D1B1, D2B2, B1E1, B2E2, C1D1, C2D2, C1E1, C2E2, D1E1, D2E2, and their reciprocals) between the sample stimuli without direct training of these relations. In the other training arrangement, these relations among the comparison stimuli developed in the performance of 1 subject only. In Phase 2, three new pairs of stimuli (F1, F2; G1, G2; H1, H2) were substituted for three of the original pairs (B1, B2; C1, C2; D1, D2) and the training arrangements for the groups were reversed. Following training, the performances that showed equivalence relations on the probes in the first phase also showed equivalence relations in the second phase. If such relations did not develop in the first phase, they did not do so in the second phase. In Phase 3, relations between stimuli across the two previous phases (e.g., B1F1, B2F2, B1G1, B2H2, C1F1, etc.) were investigated. The 4 subjects whose performances showed the development of these relations were taught to select one stimulus from each class (E1 and E2) in response to a verbal label (I1 and I2) and then were tested to see if the verbal label controlled responding to the remaining members of the class (e.g., I1A1, I2A2, I1B1, I2B2, etc.). For 3 subjects, this generalized control occurred; for the 4th, generalization occurred only after verbal training with a second pair of visual stimuli (F1 and F2). In retests several months later, these auditory-visual relations were found to be intact or, if not, were recovered without direct training.     

Six-member stimulus classes generated by conditional-discrimination procedures

In conditional-discrimination procedures with three sets of stimuli, A, B, and C, three stimuli per set (A1A2A3, B1B2B3, and C1C2C3), subjects (children and adults) learned to select Set-B and Set-C comparisons conditionally upon Set-A samples (A1B1, A1C1, A2B2, A2C2, A3B3, A3C3). If the conditional-discrimination procedures also generated equivalence relations, three 3-member stimulus classes would be demonstrable, A1B1C1, A2B2C2, and A3B3C3. In addition to these three sets, the present experiments used three other sets of stimuli--D, E, and F. The subjects learned to select Set-E and Set-F comparisons conditionally upon Set-D samples (D1E1, D1F1, D2E2, D2F2, D3E3, D3F3). This established a second group of three 3-member stimulus classes, D1E1F1, D2E2F2, and D3E3F3. In all, two groups of three 3-member classes were established by teaching subjects 12 conditional discriminations. The two groups of 3-member classes were then combined (successfully for 5 of 8 subjects) into a single group of three 6-member classes by teaching the subjects three more conditional relations (E1C1, E2C2, and E3C3). With three other children, enlarging the classes one member at a time also produced 6-member classes. As a consequence of class formation, 60 untrained conditional relations emerged from 15 that had been explicitly taught. Six of the subjects also proved capable of naming the stimuli consistently in accord with their class membership, but two subjects demonstrated class formation even in the absence of consistent naming.     

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 effect of logarithmic transformation on estimating the parameters of the generalized matching law

This study examined stimulus class membership established via stimulus-reinforcer relations. Mentally retarded subjects learned conditional discriminations with four two-member sets of visual stimuli (A, B, C, and D). On arbitrary-matching trials, they selected comparison stimuli B1 and B2 conditionally upon samples A1 and A2, respectively, and C1 and C2 conditionally upon B1 and B2, respectively. On identity-matching trials, they selected all stimuli as comparisons conditionally upon identical stimuli as samples. Throughout training, correct selections of A1, B1, C1, and D1 were followed by one reinforcer, R1, and those of A2, B2, C2, and D2 were followed by another, R2. Subsequent tests documented the formation of two four-member stimulus classes, A1-B1-C1-D1 and A2-B2-C2-D2. The class membership of the A, B, and C stimuli could have been based on equivalence relations that resulted from the arbitrary-matching training. D1 and D2 had never appeared on arbitrary-matching trials, however. Their class membership must have been based on relations with R1 and R2, respectively. Results thus confirm a previous finding that stimulus classes can be expanded via stimulus-reinforcer relations. They also define more precisely the potential nature of those classes and the conditions under which class membership can be established.     

Reversal of baseline relations and stimulus equivalence: I. Adults

Following the emergence of two four-member equivalence classes (A1B1C1D1 and A2B2C2D2), 5 students were exposed to a series of phases including a baseline conditional discrimination reversal (i.e., choosing D2 was reinforced and D1 punished given Sample A1; choosing D1 was reinforced and D2 punished given Sample A2), the delayed introduction of CD/DC transitivity/equivalence probes, DE conditional discrimination training, a second baseline conditional discrimination reversal (i.e., choosing C2 was reinforced given B1, etc.), and a return to original baseline reinforcement contingencies. Results showed that baseline and symmetry probe performances were extremely sensitive to baseline modifications. In contrast, patterns on transitivity/equivalence probes remained predominantly consistent with the originally established equivalence classes, although there were exceptions on some E probe relations for 2 subjects. The dissociation between baseline and symmetry versus transitivity/equivalence patterns may have important implications because it is not easily accounted for by current models of equivalence phenomena.     

Establishing derived categorical responding in children with disabilities using the PEAK‐E curriculum

The purpose of the study was to evaluate a procedure to generate derived categorical responding by three children with disabilities and to promote the emergence of untrained intraverbal categorical responses. In the study, three 4‐member equivalence classes including three stimuli (A, B, and C) and a category name (D) for each class were trained using a match‐to‐sample procedure. Test probes were conducted for categorical responding, including both a trained (D‐A) and two derived (D‐B, D‐C) relational responses, as well as the emergence of untrained intraverbal categorical responding (D‐A/B/C) throughout the study. Relational training was effective at promoting the emergence of categorical responding, and two of the three participants demonstrated the emergence of additional intraverbal responding without prior training. The results provide further evidence supporting the practical utility of stimulus equivalence as well as the PEAK‐E curriculum.     

Relations among equivalence, naming, and conflicting baseline control

Three studies were conducted with different groups of 6 students each to explore the effects of training class-inconsistent relations and naming on demonstrations of emergent arbitrary stimulus relations. In all studies, two three-member equivalence classes of Greek symbols (A1B1C1 and A2B2C2) emerged as a result of training in conditional discriminations. Two new symbols were introduced (X and Y), and additional conditional discriminations were trained, whereby X was designated as the positive discriminative stimulus (S+) and Y was designated as the negative discriminative stimulus (S-) for A1 and B2. Conversely, Y was designated as the S+ and X as the S- for B1 and A2. This introduced conflicting sources of control within and between classes. In Study 1, subjects were not provided with names for the stimuli. In Study 2, the experimenter provided common names for the stimuli within each class. In Study 3, the subjects were required to use the common names during conditional discrimination training and test-trial blocks. In all experiments, equivalence responding with respect to the original classes was disrupted for some subjects subsequent to learning the new relations. Furthermore, in Studies 2 and 3, there were frequent examples of noncorrespondence between observed (listener or speaker) naming patterns and derived relations. These results support the view that demonstrations of equivalence are subject to control from a variety of sources rather than being fundamentally dependent on naming.     

Stimulus equivalence: testing Sidman's (2000) theory

Sidman's (2000) theory regarding the origin of equivalence relations predicts that a reinforcing stimulus common to distinct equivalence classes must drop out of the equivalence relations. This prediction was tested in the present study by arranging class-specific reinforcers, R1 and R2, following correct responding on the prerequisite conditional discriminations (Ax-Bx, Cx-Bx) for two stimulus classes, A1B1C1 and A2B2C2. A class-common reinforcer, R3, was presented following correct responding on the prerequisite conditional discriminations for a further two stimulus classes, A3B3C3 and A4B4C4. Sidman's theory predicts reinforcer inclusion within Classes 1 and 2 only, given this training arrangement. Experiment 1 tested for the emergence of four equivalence classes and of stimulus-reinforcer and reinforcer-stimulus relations in each class. Four of the 6 subjects demonstrated the reinforcer-based relations in all four equivalence classes, rather than in only those classes with a class-specific reinforcer, as Sidman's theory predicts. One of the remaining 2 subjects showed the reinforcer-based relations in three of the four classes. Experiment 2 extended these findings to document the emergence of interclass matching relations based on the common reinforcer R3, in 5 of 6 subjects, such that a Class 3 sample occasioned the selection of a Class 4 sample when the Class 3 comparison was absent, and similarly, a Class 4 sample occasioned the selection of a Class 3 comparison when the Class 4 comparison was absent. These interclass relations emerged despite the simultaneous maintenance of Class 3 and 4 baseline conditional discriminations, so that the Class 3 and 4 stimuli and reinforcer simultaneously were, and were not, part of a single larger equivalence class. These data are irreconcilable with Sidman's theory, and question the utility of the application of the equivalence relation in describing derived stimulus relations.     

Expansion of arbitrary stimulus classes and function-transfer measured by sorting performances

Sorting (SRT) and matching-to-sample (MTS) tests have measured the formation of arbitrary stimulus classes. This experiment used SRT and MTS tests to document the expansion of class size. Thirty-two participants learned 12 conditional discriminations with a linear series training structure (A➔B➔C➔D➔E). SRT tests documented the formation of 5-member classes by 17 of the participants. Thereafter, 6-member class expansion was implemented by FC training. Nine of these 17 participants showed class expansion when tracked with a sequence of an SRT, MTS, and a final SRT test, and the other 8 showed expansion when tracked with a sequence of MTS and SRT tests. Thus, SRT tests documented class expansion, and the sequence of tests did not influence class expansion. The 15 participants who did not form the 5-member classes learned the baselines for new 3-member classes (A➔B➔C) and formed them as documented by an SRT test. Then, 4-member class expansion was implemented by FB training. Expansion was assessed using the above-mentioned testing sequences. All 15 showed class expansion with 100% correspondence between the SRT and MTS performances. Sorting documented the expansion of arbitrary stimulus classes, while the MTS tests showed that the stimuli also functioned as members of equivalence classes.     

A new approach to the formation of equivalence classes in pigeons

Four pigeons were given simultaneous discrimination training with visual patterns arbitrarily divided into two sets, with the stimuli in one set designated A1, B1, C1, and D1 and those in the other set designated A2, B2, C2, and D2. In sequentially introduced training phases, the pigeons were exposed to a series of reversals to establish AB and then CD equivalences. In subsequent testing sessions, a subset of stimuli from one set served as positive stimuli and those from the other set as negative stimuli on training trials, and transfer of the reinforced relation to other members of the sets was tested with nonreinforced probe trials. The pigeons were trained further on AC and BD equivalences and then were tested for the emergence of untrained AD and BC equivalences. Two of the 4 pigeons exhibited the emergence of one of these untrained equivalences, evidence for the emergence of transitive relations. This finding suggests that the pigeons established three-member functional equivalence classes by incorporating separately trained multiple equivalence relations. Repeated reversal training and probe testing enabled us to explore the formation and expansion of functional equivalence classes in pigeons.     

Transfer of specific contextual functions to novel conditional discriminations

Three adolescents and 4 children participated in studies designed to examine contextually controlled conditional discrimination performance. In Study 1, participants selected Comparison B1 in the presence one stimulus (A1) and Comparison B2 in the presence of another stimulus (A2) using a matching-to-sample procedure. Next, contextual stimuli X1 or X2 were presented, such that in the presence of X1, selection of B1 given A1 and selection of B2 given A2 were reinforced; and in the presence of X2, selection of B2 given A1 and selection of B1 given A2 were reinforced. Then, new conditional discriminations were taught with Stimuli E and F. When the contextual Stimuli X1 and X2 were presented, participants selected the same comparisons as previously established in the EF relations in the presence of X1, but the opposite comparison as in the EF relations in the presence of X2. The results then were replicated with new Stimuli G and H. In Study 2, a new conditional discrimination, CD, was taught. Then, four combinations of two-element samples--C1 and D1, C2 and D2, C1 and D2, or C2 and D1--were presented with X1 and X2 as comparisons. Five of 6 participants selected X1 in the presence of C1 and D1 or C2 and D2, and selected X2 in the presence of C1 and D2 or C2 and D1. Finally, in Study 3, two new discriminations IJ and JK were taught. Then, the transitive IK relations were tested with X1 and X2 as contextual stimuli. The 4 participants selected K1 in the presence of I1 and K2 in the presence of I2 when the contextual stimulus was X1--demonstrating class formation--and selected the other comparisons when the contextual stimulus was X2. These results suggest that the contextual control functions of X1 and X2 transferred even to relations that had not been directly taught. These results extend those demonstrating generalized contextual control by showing transfer of functions of the contextual stimuli in transitivity tests and when the former contextual stimuli were presented as comparisons.     

Transfer of conditioned fear and avoidance: Concurrent measurement of arousal and operant responding

A reversal design was employed for the analysis of transfer of fear and avoidance through equivalence classes. Two 5-member equivalence classes (A1-B1-C1-D1-E1 and A2-B2-C2-D2-E2) were established. Then B1 and C1 were paired with shock (CS+) and served as S^Ds in avoidance training (B2 and C2 were trained as CS-/S^∆s for avoidance). Further avoidance training followed with D1 and E1 (as S^Ds) and D2 and E2 (as S^∆s), with the first presentation of each of these stimuli serving as the first transfer test. Afterwards, aversive conditioning contingencies were reversed: B2 and D2 were paired with shock and trained as S^Ds for avoidance, B1 and D1 were presented without shock (CS-/S^∆s). Transfer was tested again with C1, E1, C2 and E2. This reversal was implemented to allow for the within-subject replication of transfer effects upon changes in the function of only a subset of each class's elements. Avoidance (key presses) and conditioned fear (skin conductance and heart rate) were simultaneously measured. Results show a clear transfer effect for avoidance, with between- and within-subject replications. For physiological measures, transfer effects in the first test could only be imputed on the basis of group-based inferential statistical analysis. Evidence for between-subject replication was weaker, with only a limited proportion of participants meeting the individual criterion for transfer.     

Testing response-stimulus equivalence relations using differential responses as a sample

This study tested the notion that an equivalence relation may include a response when differential responses are paired with stimuli presented during training. Eight normal adults learned three kinds of computer mouse movements as differential response topographies (R1, R2, and R3). Next, in matching-to-sample training, one of the response topographies was used to select a comparison stimulus B (B1, B2, or B3) conditionally upon presentation of sample stimulus A (A1, A2, or A3), and to select stimulus D (D1, D2, or D3) conditionally upon presentation of stimulus C (C1, C2, or C3). After two sample-comparison-response relations (ABR and CDR) were established, 18 sample-comparison relations were tested (BA, DC, RA, RB, RC, RD, AC, CA, AD, DA, BC, CB, BD, DB, AA, BB, CC, and DD). In the RA, RB, RC, and RD tests, the differential responses (R1, R2, and R3) were used as sample stimuli. All subjects made class-consistent comparison selections in the tests. This study provides evidence that responses may become members of an equivalence class.     

Transfer of baseline reject control to transitivity trials and its effect on equivalence class formation

This study explored the role of baseline reject control on transitivity responding. In Experiment 1, participants learned to respond to a baseline of arbitrary AB and AC conditional relations, and then they were exposed to transitivity‐like BC and CB trials in which the correct comparison stimulus was replaced by a novel stimulus (D). Five of 10 participants selected stimulus D, but only 1 showed expansion of the baseline stimulus classes to include the D stimuli. In Experiment 2, the emergence of symmetry and transitivity from baseline relations was assessed before participants were exposed to the transitivity‐like trials. Six of 8 participants who showed emergence of equivalence relations selected the D stimuli on transitivity‐like trials and provided evidence that baseline classes expanded to include these stimuli. In Experiment 3, these 6 participants selected novel stimuli (E) in additional transitivity‐like trials, and all showed that the E stimuli had become members of the previously established classes, which now comprised 5 members. A route for the emergence of transitivity by way of the transfer of baseline between‐classes reject control is discussed.     

Relations between baseline contingencies and equivalence probe performances

Following the emergence of two three-member equivalence classes (A1B1C1 and A2B2C2), 5 college students were exposed to one or more changes in the reinforcement contingencies controlling baseline conditional discriminations. AC relations were either reversed (i.e., C2 was reinforced and C1 punished when A1 was the sample; C1 was reinforced and C2 punished when A2 was the sample) or arranged randomly (i.e., C2 and C1 were reinforced and punished equally often in the presence of A1 and A2). In a third condition, the original AB and AC relations were reversed. Results showed that although baseline conditional discrimination performances were under the control of reinforcement contingencies, and performances on symmetry trials varied with baseline responding for 3 of 4 subjects when contingencies were reversed, performances on transitivity probes remained consistent with the initial equivalence class. These inconsistencies between probe and baseline performances were striking because conditional discriminations are thought to be the determinants of equivalence class performance. Similarly, the contrast between performances on symmetry and transitivity probes was of theoretical interest because equivalence classes are defined by congruent patterns of responding on probe trials.     

EMERGENT CONDITIONAL RELATIONS IN A GO/NO‐GO PROCEDURE: FIGURE—GROUND AND STIMULUS‐POSITION COMPOUND RELATIONS

Past research has demonstrated emergent conditional relations using a go/no‐go procedure with pairs of figures displayed side‐by‐side on a computer screen. The present study sought to extend applications of this procedure. In Experiment 1, we evaluated whether emergent conditional relations could be demonstrated when two‐component stimuli were displayed in figure—ground relationships—abstract figures displayed on backgrounds of different colors. Five normally capable adults participated. During training, each two‐component stimulus was presented successively. Responses emitted in the presence of some stimulus pairs (A1B1, A2B2, A3B3, B1C1, B2C2 and B3C3) were reinforced, whereas responses emitted in the presence of other pairs (A1B2, A1B3, A2B1, A2B3, A3B1, A3B2, B1C2, B1C3, B2C1, B2C3, B3C1 and B3C2) were not. During tests, new configurations (AC and CA) were presented, thus emulating structurally the matching‐to‐sample tests employed in typical equivalence studies. All participants showed emergent relations consistent with stimulus equivalence during testing. In Experiment 2, we systematically replicated the procedures with stimulus compounds consisting of four figures (A1, A2, C1 and C2) and two locations (left — B1 and right — B2). All 6 normally capable adults exhibited emergent stimulus—stimulus relations. Together, these experiments show that the go/no‐go procedure is a potentially useful alternative for studying emergent conditional relations when matching‐to‐sample is procedurally cumbersome or impossible to use.     

Relational discrimination by pigeons in a go/no-go procedure with compound stimuli: a methodological note

A go/no‐go procedure with compound stimuli typically establishes emergent behavior that parallels in structure and typical outcome that of conventional tests for symmetric, transitive, and equivalence relations in normally capable adults. The present study employed a go/no‐go compound stimulus procedure with pigeons. During training, pecks to two‐component compounds A1B1, A2B2, B1C1, and B2C2 were followed by food. Pecks to compounds A1B2, A2B1, B1C2, and B2C1 re‐started the 30‐s stimulus presentation interval. The absence of pecking to those compounds for 30 s ended the trial. Subsequent tests presented these components in new spatial arrangements and/or in recombinative compounds that together corresponded to conventional tests of symmetry, transitivity, and equivalence: B1A1, B2A2, C1B1, C2B2, A1C1, A2C2, C1A1, C2A2 vs. B1A2, B2A1, C1B2, C2B1, A1C2, A2C1, C1A2, C2A1 (positive vs. negative instances of symmetric, transitive, and equivalence relations). On tests for symmetric relations, all pigeons behaved in a manner consistent with training on both positive instances (i.e., by responding) and on negative instances (i.e., by not responding). By contrast, the pigeons' behavior on tests for transitivity and equivalence was inconsistent with baseline training, thus failing to show the recombinative discrimination performance that is typical of normally capable humans when trained and tested using the go/no‐go procedure with compound stimuli.