Reduction of stimulus overselectivity with nonverbal differential observing responses

Three individuals with mental retardation exhibited stimulus overselectivity in a delayed matching-to-sample task in which two sample stimuli were displayed on each trial. Intermediate accuracy scores indicated that participants could match one of the samples but not both of them. Accuracy in a baseline condition was compared to accuracy with a differential observing response procedure. This procedure prompted participants to make simultaneous identity-matching responses that required observation and discrimination of both sample stimuli. These observing responses were never followed by differential consequences. When observing responses were prompted, participants' accuracy scores improved. In a return to the baseline condition, when differential observing responses were no longer prompted, accuracy returned to intermediate levels. The results show that stimulus overselectivity can be greatly reduced by a behavioral intervention that controls observing behavior and verifies discrimination, but that exposure to such procedures alone may be insufficient for lasting benefits.     

Reducing stimulus overselectivity through an increased observing-response requirement

An adult with autism and a mild intellectual disability participated in a 0-s delayed matching-to-sample task. In each trial, two sample stimuli were presented together until the participant completed an observing-response requirement consisting of 1 or 10 mouse clicks in the baseline and experimental phases, respectively. One of the two sample stimuli then appeared randomly as a comparison stimulus (S+), along with two other comparison stimuli (S-). Higher levels of correct responding occurred under the larger observing-response requirement, and the proportion of errors related to one of the two sample stimuli decreased. Thus, stimulus overselectivity was reduced without requiring differential observing responses.     

Reinforcer frequency and restricted stimulus control.

Stimulus control was evaluated in 3 individuals with moderate to severe mental retardation by delayed identity matching-to-sample procedures that presented either one or two discrete forms as sample stimuli on each trial. On pretests, accuracy scores on one-sample trials were uniformly high. On two-sample trials, the correct stimulus (i.e., the one that subsequently appeared in the comparison array) varied unpredictably, and accuracy scores were substantially lower, suggesting that both sample stimuli did not exert stimulus control on every trial. Subjects were then given training sessions with the one-sample task and with a new set of four stimuli. For two of the stimuli, correct matching responses were followed by reinforcers on a variable-ratio schedule that led to a high reinforcer rate. For the other two stimuli, correct responses were followed by reinforcers on a variable-ratio schedule that led to a substantially lower reinforcer rate. Results on two-sample tests that followed showed that (a) on trials in which comparison arrays consisted of one high reinforcer-rate and one low reinforcer-rate stimulus, subjects most often selected the high-rate stimulus; and (b) on trials in which the comparison arrays were either two high reinforcer-rate stimuli or two low reinforcer-rate stimuli and the samples were one high reinforcer- and one low reinforcer-rate stimulus, accuracy was higher on trials with the high-rate comparisons. These results indicate that the frequency of stimulus control by high reinforcer-rate samples was greater than that by low reinforcer-rate samples. Following more training with the one-sample task and reversed reinforcement schedules for all stimuli, the differences in stimulus control frequencies on two-sample tests also reversed. These results demonstrate experimental control by reinforcement contingencies of which of two sample stimuli controlled selections in the two-sample task. The procedures and results may prove to be relevant for understanding restricted stimulus control and stimulus overselectivity.     

A discrimination analysis of training-structure effects on stimulus equivalence outcomes.

Experiments designed to establish stimulus equivalence classes frequently produce differential outcomes that may be attributable to training structure, defined as the order and arrangement of baseline conditional discrimination training trials. Several possible explanations for these differences have been suggested. Here we develop a hypothesis based on an analysis of the simple simultaneous and successive discriminations embedded in conditional discrimination training and testing within each of the training structures that are typically used in stimulus equivalence experiments. Our analysis shows that only the comparison-as-node (many-to-one) structure presents all the simple discriminations in training that are subsequently required for consistently positive outcomes on all tests for the properties of equivalence. The sample-as-node (one-to-many) training structure does not present all the simple discriminations required for positive outcomes on either the symmetry or combined transitivity and symmetry (equivalence) tests. The linear-series training structure presents all the simple discriminations required for consistently positive outcomes on tests for symmetry, but not for symmetry and transitivity combined (equivalence) or transitivity alone. Further, the difference in the number of simple discriminations presented in comparison-as-node training versus the other training structures is larger when the intended class size is greater than three or the number of classes is larger than two. We discuss the relevance of this analysis to interpretations of stimulus equivalence research, as well as some methodological and theoretical implications.     

Effects of response disparity on stimulus and reinforcer control in human detection tasks

In two detection experiments, university students reported whether the second of two sequentially presented tones was longer or shorter than the first by responding to stimuli presented on a touch screen. Stimulus disparity and response disparity were manipulated to compare their effects on measures of discrimination and response bias when the reinforcement ratio for correct responses was asymmetric. Choice stimuli consisted of squares filled with different pixel densities. Response disparity was manipulated by varying the difference in density between the two choice stimuli. In both experiments, decreasing stimulus disparity reduced discrimination but had no consistent effect on bias. Decreasing response disparity also reduced discrimination in both experiments, and often reduced estimates of bias. The effects of response disparity on bias were most clear in Experiment 2, in which a greater overall level of response disparity was arranged. The data show that, like corresponding research with pigeons, detection performance of human subjects can be conceptualized as discriminated operants.     

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.     

Transfer of contextual stimulus function via equivalence class development

In a conditional discrimination, 6 college students arranged six Cyrillic letters into groups of three based upon which of two additional Cyrillic letters (contextual stimuli) was present. All subjects demonstrated symmetry and transitivity within each class of equivalent stimuli. In a second conditional discrimination, two more Cyrillic letters were related to each contextual stimulus. Testing of symmetrical and transitive relations between the original contextual stimulus and the two new ones confirmed the development of two three-member classes of contextual stimuli. Subsequent tests demonstrated that the new contextual stimuli controlled the previously trained sample-comparison relations for all subjects.     

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.     

Simple discrimination in stingless bees (Melipona quadrifasciata): Probing for select‐ and reject‐stimulus control

Simple and conditional discrimination training may produce various types of controlling relations. Responses may be controlled primarily by the positive stimulus (select–control relation) or by the negative stimulus (reject–control relation; the subject excludes the negative stimulus and chooses the positive). Bees learn to respond in simple and conditional discriminations. However, no study has searched for reject–control responding in Melipona bees. We trained Melipona quadrifasciata on a simple discrimination task (S+ vs. S‐; e.g., blue vs. yellow) and then probed for stimulus control with two types of probe trials, S+ versus a new stimulus (Select–control probes) and S‐ versus a new stimulus (Reject–control probes). For Group Different, a new‐stimulus color (e.g., white) was used in one type of probe and another color (e.g., black) was used in the other type. For Group Same, a single new‐stimulus color was used in both types of probes. On Select probes, the bees always preferred S+ to the new stimulus. On Reject probes, results were mixed. Depending on the colors used in training and probing, bees responded to both stimuli, and even preferred the S‐. The data suggest no control by the negative function of the S‐ and support the select‐stimulus control hypothesis of responding.     

Thinking about the past,present, and future: Time perspective and self-esteem in adolescents,young adults,middle-aged adults,and older adults

We examined time perspective and self-esteem in adolescents, young adults, middle-aged adults, and older adults. Time perspective was measured with scales that assess relative orientations and relationships among the past, present, and future. Age effects were examined with standard analytic strategies to determine categorical differences between age groups and with new statistical techniques designed to show continuous age patterns. Findings indicated that (1) thinking about the future was greatest for adolescents and young adults and lowest for middle-aged and older adults, and thinking about the present increased across ages; (2) fewer adolescents and middle-aged participants perceived that the time periods were interrelated compared to younger and older adults; and (3) across ages, a greater emphasis towards the past compared to other time periods was associated with lower self-esteem, whereas emphasizing the present and the future jointly was associated with higher self-esteem.     

内隐重复效应影响外显工作记忆的年龄差异

采用延迟样本匹配任务并控制被试对部分项目的有意识学习经验, 当前研究考察了老年被试与青年被试在追逐靶、排除分心物的过程中, 重复启动效应如何受到项目外显学习经验的影响。老年被试和青年被试首先学习一些物体图片, 这些熟悉的图片与一些新图片作为之后工作记忆任务的靶或分心物。结果发现, 老年被试与青年被试在追逐靶和排除分心物的过程中均受到项目之前学习经验的影响。无论是老年被试还是青年被试, 对靶的反应时均快于对分心物的反应时, 对外显学习过的靶(即熟悉靶)的反应时快于对未学习过的靶(即新靶)的反应时, 而拒绝熟悉的分心物需要的时间长于拒绝新分心物的时间。其次, 老年被试与青年被试均表现出对靶的重复效应, 即当靶(无论是熟悉的还是新的)在任务中重复出现时, 对其的反应时加快; 然而, 对分心物的重复效应显著减小。随着项目多次重复, 重复效应整体上减小, 但该效应的变化受到项目属性(靶或分心物)以及项目之前学习经验的影响。重要的是, 当熟悉的分心物反复出现时, 老年被试不但没有出现重复效应, 反而在拒绝该熟悉分心物上表现出困难, 反应时显著延长, 而在青年被试上没有该表现。这些结果说明, 老年被试的工作记忆任务成绩容易受到内隐熟悉性的干扰, 重复出现的干扰项产生的熟悉性使得老年被试难以拒绝。     

Using the stimulus equivalence paradigm to teach course material in an undergraduate rehabilitation course

In 2 experiments, we examined whether the stimulus equivalence instructional paradigm could be used to teach relations among names, definitions, causes, and common treatments for disabilities using a selection-based intraverbal training format. Participants were pre- and posttested on vocal intraverbal relations and were trained using multiple-choice worksheets in which selection-based intraverbal relations were taught and feedback was delivered until mastery. Most participants in Experiment 1 showed the emergence of vocal intraverbal relations, but responding did not generalize to final written intraverbal tests. Participants in Experiment 2 showed the emergence of not only vocal intraverbal relations but also written intraverbal relations on final tests. Results suggest that the stimulus equivalence paradigm can be effectively implemented using a selection-based intraverbal training format, the protocol may be an effective means of emphasizing important concepts in a college course, and emergent skills may generalize to novel response topographies.     

Toward a technology of derived stimulus relations: an analysis of articles published in the journal of applied behavior analysis, 1992-2009

Every article on stimulus equivalence or derived stimulus relations published in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis was evaluated in terms of characteristics that are relevant to the development of applied technologies: the type of participants, settings, procedure (automated vs. tabletop), stimuli, and stimulus sensory modality; types of relations targeted and emergent skills demonstrated by participants; and presence versus absence of evaluation of generalization and maintenance. In most respects, published reports suggested the possibility of applied technologies but left the difficult work of technology development to future investigations, suggestions for which are provided.     

The role of naming in stimulus categorization by preschool children

The purpose of the current study was to assess whether children would categorize pictures when taught the relevant listener and speaker behaviors separately. A category-sort test was used to assess emergent conditional relations. Category-sort trials consisted of looking at (Test 1) or tacting/labeling (Test 2) a sample stimulus and selecting the appropriate comparison stimuli. In Experiment 1, 4 children (3-5 years) were taught to tact pictures of six U.S. state maps as either north or south. An assessment was conducted to determine whether they would (1) correctly categorize or sort when presented with a visual sample and (2) select the correct stimuli when hearing their category names (listener behavior). Two of the children categorized the pictures during Posttest 1 after the initial (pairwise) tact training. The other 2 categorized after receiving additional tact training with all pictures presented together. However, one of them categorized only during Posttest 2. In Experiment 2, 4 children (3-5 years) were taught to select pictures when hearing their category names. An assessment was conducted to determine whether they would (1) correctly categorize or sort and (2) tact the stimuli (speaker behavior). One child categorized the pictures during Posttest 1, and two during Posttest 2. The other child required additional training with all pictures grouped together. When participants failed to categorize, they also failed to tact the pictures accurately. Taken together, results from Experiments 1 and 2 show that both speaker and listener behavior play an important role in stimulus categorization.     

Development and crossmodal transfer of contextual control of emergent stimulus relations

Six normally capable adults first learned three conditional relations in each of two prospective equivalence classes via match-to-sample training with figures as conditional (sample) and discriminative (comparison) stimuli. Then one trained conditional relation in each prospective class was brought under the control of contextual stimuli, two dictated nonsense syllables. Test performances indicated the emergence of untrained conditional relations, and therefore two equivalence classes, that were conditional on the contextual stimuli. These tests involved untrained combinations of contextual stimuli and stimuli in conditional relations, suggesting that the contextual stimuli functioned independently to control conditional relations rather than forming compound stimuli with samples and comparisons in training. Next, two novel figures were made equivalent to each of the original dictated contextual stimuli by match-to-sample training and testing. On subsequent tests, all subjects demonstrated transfer of conditional control of untrained conditional relations from the original auditory contextual stimuli to equivalent visual stimuli. These outcomes further supported the conclusion that the contextual stimuli exerted true conditional control over conditional relations in the equivalence classes and were not merely elements of compound stimuli.     

Stimulus class membership established via stimulus-reinforcer relations

In an arbitrary matching-to-sample procedure, two mentally retarded subjects learned conditional discriminations with two sets of stimuli. Each set included a spoken name (N1 or N2), an object (O1 or O2), and a printed symbol (S1 or S2). One subject selected conditionally (a) O1 upon N1, and O2 upon N2, and (b) S1 upon O1, and S2 upon O2. The other subject selected conditionally (a) S1 upon N1, and S2 upon N2, and (b) O1 upon S1, and O2 upon S2. For both subjects, selections of O1 and S1 produced one type of food, F1; selections of O2 and S2 produced a different type of food, F2. Both subjects also learned identity-matching performances, selecting O1, O2, S1, S2, F1, and F2 conditionally upon those stimuli as samples; F1 followed selections of O1, S1, and F1; F2 followed selections of O2, S2, and F2. Matching performances consistent with stimulus class formation involving the names, objects, symbols, and foods were demonstrated on probe trials, even though these performances had not been taught explicitly. Next, new objects, X1 and X2, were presented on identity-matching trials, producing F1 and F2, respectively. Without further training, X1 was selected conditionally upon N1, S1, and O1, and X2 was selected upon N2, S2, and O2. When the contingencies were changed so that selections of X1 and X2 were now followed by F2 and F1, respectively, X2 was selected conditionally upon N1, S1, and O1, and X1 was selected upon N2, S2, and O2. Class membership of X1 and X2 had apparently changed. This study provides evidence that reinforcers may become members of stimulus classes, and that new stimuli may become class members through relations with reinforcers.     

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.     

Discriminability of frequency of food or stimulus presentations in variable-time schedules

Pigeons responded in a two-alternative forced-choice task in which reinforcement was dependent upon the frequency of events that occurred in an immediately preceding schedule sample. On a given trial the events were either brief food presentations or brief visual and auditory stimulus changes. High levels of stimulus control were obtained by food-presentation schedules only. Discriminative control by frequency or stimulus change was absent. Stimulus control by food frequency was decreased by the imposition of a delay period between the schedule sample and the choice. Moreover, stimulus control by food frequency was related to the ratio of food-presentation schedule pairs when novel schedules were presented in a transfer test.