A transfer of functions through derived arbitrary and nonarbitrary stimulus relations

During Experiments 1 and 2, subjects were trained in a series of related conditional discriminations in a matching-to-sample format (A1-B1, A1-C1 and A2-B2, A2-C2). A low-rate performance was then explicitly trained in the presence of B1, and a high-rate performance was explicitly trained in the presence of B2. The two types of schedule performance transferred to the C stimuli for all subjects in both experiments, in the absence of explicit reinforcement through equivalence (i.e., C1 = low rate and C2 = high rate). In Experiment 2, it was also shown that these discriminative functions transferred from the C1-C2 stimuli to two novel stimuli that were physically similar to the C stimuli (SC1 and SC2, respectively). For both these experiments, subjects demonstrated the predicted equivalence responding during matching-to-sample equivalence tests. In Experiments 3 and 4, the conditional discrimination training from the first two experiments was modified in that two further conditional discrimination tasks were trained (C1-D1 and C2-D2). However, for these tasks the D stimuli served only as positive comparisons, and ND1 and ND2 stimuli served as negative comparisons (i.e., C1 × ND1 and C2 × ND2). Subsequent to training, the negatively related stimuli (ND1 and ND2) did not become discriminative for the schedule performances explicitly trained in the presence of B1 and B2, respectively. Instead, the ND1 stimulus became discriminative for the schedule performance trained in the presence of B2, and ND2 became discriminative for the schedule performance trained in the presence of B1. All subjects from Experiment 4 showed that the novel stimulus SND1, which was physically similar to ND1, became discriminative for the same response pattern as that controlled by ND1. Similarly, SND2, which was physically similar to ND2, became discriminative for the same response pattern as that controlled by ND2. Subjects from both Experiments 3 and 4 also produced equivalence responding on matching-to-sample equivalence tests that corresponded perfectly to the derived performances shown on the transfer of discriminative control tests.     

A derived transfer of simple discrimination and self-reported arousal functions in spider fearful and non-spider-fearful participants

Two experiments investigated the derived transfer of functions through equivalence relations established using a stimulus pairing observation procedure. In Experiment 1, participants were trained on a simple discrimination (A1+/A2-) and then a stimulus pairing observation procedure was used to establish 4 stimulus pairings (A1-B1, A2-B2, B1-C1, B2-C2). Subsequently, a transfer of the simple discrimination functions through equivalence relations was observed (e.g., C1+/C2-). These procedures were modified in Experiment 2, which demonstrated that spider-fearful and non-spider-fearful participants show differing levels of a transfer of self-reported arousal functions for stimuli used in equivalence relations with video-based material depicting scenes with spiders. The results demonstrate that the stimulus pairing observation procedure provides a viable alternative to matching-to-sample, and also offer tentative support for a derived-relations model of the acquisition of anxiety responses in at least one sub-clinical population.     

A functional-analytic model of analogy: a relational frame analysis

The aim of this study was to explore a behavior-analytic model of analogical reasoning, defined as the discrimination of formal similarity via equivalence-equivalence responding. In Experiment 1, adult humans were trained and tested for the formation of four three-member equivalence relations: A1-B1-C1, A2-B2-C2, A3-B3-C3, and A4-B4-C4. The B and C stimuli were three-letter nonsense syllables, and the A stimulus was a colored shape. Subjects were then successfully tested for equivalence-equivalence responding (e.g., matching B1/C1 to B2/C2 rather than B3/C4). These tasks were designed such that equivalence-equivalence responding might allow subjects to discriminate a physical similarity between the relations involved. Some participants (color subjects) received only equivalence-equivalence tasks in which they might discriminate a color relation, whereas others (shape subjects) were given tasks in which they might discriminate a shape relation. A control group received both types of task. In a subsequent test for the discrimination of formal similarity, color subjects matched according to color, shape subjects matched according to shape, and the control group showed no consistent matching pattern. In Experiment 2, adult humans showed a transformation of the functions of a block-sorting task via this basic model of analogy. Empirical and conceptual issues related to these results are discussed.     

A transformation of respondently conditioned stimulus function in accordance with arbitrarily applicable relations.

Adult male subjects saw a sexual film clip paired with a nonsense syllable (C1). Similarly, an emotionally neutral film clip was paired with a second nonsense syllable (C3). Responses to the nonsense syllables were recorded as skin resistance responses. Subjects were also trained in a series of related conditional discriminations, using the C1 and C3 stimuli, from which the following equivalence relations were predicted; A1-B1-C1, A2-B2-C2, and A3-B3-C3. Some subjects were given matching-to-sample (equivalence) tests after the conditional discrimination training (Experiment 1), whereas others were not (Experiment 2). Subjects were tested for a transformation of eliciting functions by presenting the A1 and A3 stimuli, which were related through equivalence to C1 and C3, respectively. Five of the 6 subjects who showed significantly greater conditioned responses to C1 than to C3, also showed significantly greater skin resistance responses to A1 than to A3. Two additional subjects demonstrated a transformation of an eliciting stimulus function in accordance with five-member equivalence relations (Experiment 3), and another 5 subjects demonstrated similar effects in accordance with the relations of sameness and opposition (Experiment 4).     

A transfer of self-discrimination response functions through equivalence relations

The present study tested the idea that human self-discrimination response functions may transfer through equivalence relations. Four subjects were trained in six symbolic matching-to-sample tasks (if see A1, choose B1; A1-C1, A2-B2, A2-C2, A3-B3, A3-C3) and were then tested for the formation of three equivalence relations (B1-C1, B2-C2, B3-C3). Two of the B stimuli (B1 and B2) were then used to train two different self-discrimination responses using either detailed instructions (Subjects 1 to 3) or minimal instructions (Subject 4) on two complex schedules of reinforcement (i.e., subjects were trained to pick the B1 stimulus if they had not emitted a response, and to pick the B2 stimulus if they had emitted one or more responses on the previous schedule). All 4 subjects showed the predicted transfer of self-discrimination response functions through equivalence relations (i.e., no response on the schedule, pick C1; one or more responses on the schedule, pick C2). Subjects also demonstrated this transfer when they were required to discriminate their schedule performance before exposure to the schedule (i.e., “what I intend to do”). Four control subjects were also used in the study. Two of these (Subjects 5 and 6) were not exposed to any form of matching-to-sample training and testing (nonequivalence controls). The 2 remaining subjects (7 and 8) were exposed to matching-to-sample training and testing that incorporated stimuli not used during the transfer test; C1 and C2 were replaced by N1 and N2 during the matching-to-sample training and testing, but C1 and C2 were used for the transfer tests (equivalence controls). All 4 subjects failed to produce the self-discrimination transfer performances observed with the experimental subjects.     

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.     

Maintained nodal-distance effects in equivalence classes

Twelve subjects were trained to select one of two stimuli from a pair (the B pair) when presented with one of two stimuli from another pair (the A pair), thus establishing two AB relations, A1-B1 and A2-B2. In a similar fashion, additional stimuli were used to establish BC, CD, and DE relations. Trials used to train all relations occurred in each session. Once performances were established, probe trials were introduced that tested for the emergence of untrained relations (e.g., B1-D1 or A1-E1). These emergent relations were categorized according to nodal distance (i.e., the number of stimuli across which transitivity would have to hold in order for the relation to emerge). For example, a test for A2-C2 crosses one node (B2), whereas a test for A1-E1 crosses three nodes (B1, C1, and D1). Only 2 of the subjects formed equivalence classes. The evocation of class-appropriate responding by each emergent-relation probe was an inverse function of nodal distance for all 12 subjects. In addition, performance on the originally trained relations was disrupted by the introduction of probes. The 2 subjects who exhibited equivalence classes were then trained to make different numbers of key presses in the presence of each of the four A and E stimuli. In a response-transfer test, the B, C, and D stimuli evoked the responses trained to the A and E stimuli in the same equivalence class. Likelihood of class-appropriate responses was an inverse function of nodal distance, and this pattern persisted across testing. Reaction times in the transfer test were an inverted U-shaped function of nodal distance. Because training of the baseline relations occurred concurrently and the B, C, and D stimuli were presented an equal number of times before the transfer test, the test performances illustrate effects of nodal distance that were not confounded by order or amount of experience with the stimuli. The results imply that ordered, sequential exposure to individual stimulus relations may facilitate the development of equivalence classes and that the relatedness of stimuli within an equivalence class is a relatively permanent inverse function of nodal distance.     

Derived manding in children with autism: synthesizing Skinner's verbal behavior with relational frame theory

Mand functions for two stimuli (A1 and A2) were trained for 3 children with autism and were then incorporated into two related conditional discriminations (A1-B1/A2 -B2 and B1-C1/B2-C2). Tests were conducted to probe for a derived transfer of mand response functions from A1 and A2 to C1 and C2, respectively. When 1 participant failed to demonstrate derived transfer of mand response functions, transfer training using exemplars was conducted. When participants had demonstrated derived transfer of mand functions, the X1 and X2 tokens that were employed as reinforcers for mand responses were incorporated into two conditional discriminations (X1-Y1/X2-Y2 and Y1-Z1/Y2-Z2). Tests were conducted for derived transfer of reinforcing functions. Finally, tests were conducted to determine if the participants would demonstrate derived manding for the derived reinforcers (present C1 and C2 to mand for Z1 and Z2, respectively). Derived transfer of functions was observed when the sequence of training and testing was reversed (i.e., training and testing reinforcing functions before mand response functions) and when only minimal instructions were provided.     

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.     

Conditional discrimination and equivalence relations: Control by negative stimuli

Three adult subjects were taught the following two-sample, two-comparison conditional discriminations (each sample is shown with its positive and negative comparison, in that order): A1-B1B2, A2-B2B1; B1-C1C2, B2-C2C1; and C1-D1D2, C2-D2D1. A teaching procedure was designed to encourage control by negative comparisons. Subjects were then tested for emergent performances that would indicate whether the baseline conditional discriminations were reflexive, symmetric, and transitive. The tests documented the emergence of two classes of equivalent stimuli: A1, B2, C1, D2 and A2, B1, C2, D1. These were the classes to be expected if the negative comparisons were the controlling comparisons in the baseline conditional discriminations. The negative comparisons, however, were not the comparisons that subjects were recorded as having chosen in the baseline conditional discriminations. Differential test results confirmed predictions arising from a stimulus-control analysis: In reflexivity tests (AA, BB, CC, DD), subjects chose comparisons that differed from the sample; one-node transitivity (AC, BD) and "equivalence" (CA, DB) tests also yielded results that were the opposite of those to be expected from control by positive comparisons; symmetry tests (BA, CB, DC), two-node transitivity (AD) tests, and two-node "equivalence" (DA) tests yielded results that were to be expected from control by either positive or negative comparisons.     

Naming in conditional discrimination and stimulus equivalence.

Using a matching-to-sample procedure, McIntire, Cleary, and Thompson (1987) taught monkeys the conditional relations A1-R1-A1-R1, A2-R2-A2-R2, A1-R1-B1-R1, A2-R2-B2-R2, B1-R1-C1-R1, and B2-R2-C2-R2, where the first and third terms in each relation refer to the sample and comparison stimuli, respectively, and the second and last terms refer to the emission of a distinctive pattern of responding. The subjects were then tested for the emergent relations A-C, C-A, B-A, C-B, and B-B, with the differential response produced by a given stimulus during training also emitted on test trials (e.g., A1-R1-C1-R1). The performances of both subjects were as accurate on the tested relations as they had been on the trained relations. The new relations were characterized as demonstrations of stimulus equivalence. However, the conditional discrimination literature shows that such training procedures generate control of comparison selection by the differential response patterns. Therefore, no emergent relations were demonstrated because all of the trained response-stimulus relations were preserved on test trials. This paper suggests that these procedures do not provide an appropriate analogy for the kind of emergent stimulus-stimulus relations exhibited by human subjects in equivalence studies and outlines a paradigm for assessing the relative influence of stimulus-stimulus and response-stimulus relations.     

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.     

Base rate effects on the IAT

We investigated the influence of stimulus base rates on the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Using an East/West-German attitude-IAT, we demonstrated that both overall response speed and differential response speed underlying IAT effects depend on the relative frequencies of the stimulus categories. First, when those stimuli that are more common in reality also occurred more frequently in the stimulus list, response speed generally increased. Second, IAT effects increased when congruent blocks profited from the compatibility of frequency-based response biases (i.e., frequent target stimuli and frequent valence stimuli mapped onto the same response key), whereas IAT effects decreased when incongruent trial blocks profited from response compatibility. These findings demonstrate that the stimulus context moderates the magnitude of the IAT effect. Simultaneously, they highlight the need to explore the extent to which implicit measures reflect properties of the task or the environment rather than attributes of test-takers.     

A transformation of self-discrimination response functions in accordance with the arbitrarily applicable relations of sameness, more than, and less than

In Experiment 1, 2 experimental subjects were given pretraining of nonarbitrary relations that brought their responses under the control of four contextual stimuli; same, opposite, more than, and less than. One control subject was not exposed to this pretraining. The 2 pretrained subjects and the 3rd nonpretrained subject then received training in six arbitrary relations, the following four relations being the most critical: same/A1-B1, same/A1-C1, less than/A1-B2, more than/A1-C2. All 3 subjects were then tested for seven derived relations, the following three relations being the most important: same/B1-C1, more than/B1-C2, less than/B1-B2. The 2 pretrained subjects, but not the nonpretrained subject, showed the derived relations. One of the stimuli (B1) from the relational network and two novel stimuli (X1 and X2) were then used to train three different self-discrimination responses on three complex schedules of reinforcement. That is, all 3 subjects were trained to pick X1 if they had not emitted a response, to pick B1 if they had emitted one response only, and to pick X2 if they had emitted two responses only. The 2 pretrained subjects, but not the nonpretrained subject, showed the predicted transformation of self-discrimination response functions in accordance with the relations of sameness, more than, and less than (i.e., no response, pick B2; one response only, pick C1; and two responses only, pick C2). In Experiment 2, 2 new subjects were employed, and the arbitrary relational training and testing phases were modified to control for a procedural artifact that may have contributed to the results of the first experiment. Experiment 2 replicated the findings of Experiment 1. The pattern of results support the utility of a relational frames approach to understanding derived stimulus relations.     

Measuring evaluative conditioning using the Implicit Association Test

When a neutral stimulus is paired with a stimulus that has strong affective properties, these properties often appear to be transferred to the neutral stimulus. This learning has been termed evaluative conditioning. In two experiments, participants first learned the ‘meanings’ of four non-words. Two of these meanings were affectively positive, and two were affectively negative. Transfer of affect was measured in the Implicit Association Test (IAT). In the IAT, a participant’s affective response to an item is inferred from his or her ability to categorise that item with other pleasant and unpleasant stimuli. An item easily categorised with other liked stimuli is deemed to be liked itself. In both experiments, evidence for transfer of affect was observed in the IAT. Thus, non-words given pleasant meanings in training (evaluative conditioning) were more easily categorised with pleasant than unpleasant personality characteristics, compared to non-words given unpleasant meanings. The results suggest that the IAT is a useful way to test for evaluative conditioning. It is both sensitive to the transfer of affective properties from one stimulus to another, and, because affect is measured indirectly, the results are unlikely to be due to the demand characteristics of the experiment.     

Effects of a meaningful, a discriminative, and a meaningless stimulus on equivalence class formation

Thirty college students attempted to form three 3-node 5-member equivalence classes under the simultaneous protocol. After concurrent training of AB, BC, CD, and DE relations, all probes used to assess the emergence of symmetrical, transitive, and equivalence relations were presented for two test blocks. When the A-E stimuli were all abstract shapes, none of 10 participants formed classes. When the A, B, D, and E stimuli were abstract shapes and the C stimuli were meaningful pictures, 8 of 10 participants formed classes. This high yield may reflect the expansion of existing classes that consist of the associates of the meaningful stimuli, rather than the formation of the ABCDE classes, per se. When the A-E stimuli were abstract shapes and the C stimuli became S(D)s prior to class formation, 5 out of 10 participants formed classes. Thus, the discriminative functions served by the meaningful stimuli can account for some of the enhancement of class formation produced by the inclusion of a meaningful stimulus as a class member. A sorting task, which provided a secondary measure of class formation, indicated the formation of all three classes when the emergent relations probes indicated the same outcome. In contrast, the sorting test indicated "partial" class formation when the emergent relations test indicated no class formation. Finally, the effects of nodal distance on the relatedness of stimuli in the equivalence classes were not influenced by the functions served by the C stimuli in the equivalence classes.     

Conditional relations with compound abstract stimuli using a go/no-go procedure

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether emergent conditional relations could be established with a go/no-go procedure using compound abstract stimuli. The procedure was conducted with 6 adult humans. During training, responses emitted in the presence of certain stimulus compounds (A1B1, A2B2, A3B3, B1C1, B2C2, and B3C3) were followed by reinforcing consequences (points); responses emitted in the presence of other compounds (A1B2, A1B3, A2B1, A2B3, A3B1, A3B2, B1C2, B1C3, B2C1, B2C3, B3C1 and B3C2) were not (i.e., extinction). During subsequent tests of emergent relations, new configurations (BA, CB, AC, and CA relations) were presented, formed by the recombination of training stimuli and structurally resembling tests usually employed in stimulus equivalence studies. Results showed that all 6 participants displayed immediate emergence of relations consistent with symmetry. Four participants exhibited emergent relations consistent with both transitivity and equivalence. These results indicate that a go/no-go procedure with compound stimuli can establish emergent conditional relations, thus providing a procedural alternative to the matching-to-sample procedures commonly used in studies of stimulus equivalence.     

Transformation of avoidance response functions in accordance with same and opposite relational frames

Research on the emergence of human avoidance behavior in the absence of direct contact with an aversive event is somewhat limited. Consistent with work on derived relational responding, the present study sought to investigate the transformation of avoidance response functions in accordance with the relational frames of Same and Opposite. Participants were first exposed to nonarbitrary and arbitrary relational training and testing in order to establish Same and Opposite relations among arbitrary stimuli. The training tasks were; Same-A1-B1, Same-A1-C1, Opposite-A1-B2, Opposite-A1-C2. Next, all possible combinatorially entailed (i.e., B-C and C-B) relations were tested. During the avoidance-conditioning phase, one stimulus (B1) from the relational network signaled a simple avoidance response that cancelled a scheduled presentation of an aversive image and sound. All but one of the participants who met the criteria for conditioned avoidance also demonstrated derived avoidance by emitting the avoidance response in the presence of C1 and the nonavoidance response in the presence of C2. Control participants who were not exposed to relational training and testing did not show derived avoidance. Implications of the findings for understanding clinically significant avoidance behavior are discussed.     

Incongruous stimulus pairing and conditional discrimination training: effects on relational responding

In Experiment 1, 5 subjects were exposed to a stimulus-pairing procedure in which two nonsense syllables, identified by a letter-number code as A1 and C2, each predicted the onset of a sexual film clip, and the nonsense syllables A2 and C1 each predicted the onset of a nonsexual film clip. Subjects were then exposed to a matching-to-sample test in which the nonsense syllables A1 and A2 were presented as sample stimuli and C1 and C2 were presented as comparison stimuli and vice versa (i.e., C stimuli as samples and A stimuli as comparisons). All subjects matched A1 with C2 and A2 with C1. Subjects were then trained on the conditional discriminations A1-B1, A2-B2, B1-C1, B2-C2, after which the matching-to-sample test was again administered. All subjects continued to match A1 with C2 and A2 with C1 in accordance with the earlier stimulus-pairing contingencies. An additional 5 subjects were exposed first to conditional discrimination training and testing before being exposed to the incongruous stimulus pairing and matching-to-sample testing. Under these conditions, 4 of the 5 subjects always matched A1 with C1 and A2 with C2. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1, except that a matching-to-sample test was not administered following the initial training procedure. Under these conditions, matching-to-sample test performances were controlled by the contingencies that had immediately preceded the test. Experiment 3 indicated that initial matching-to-sample test performances were unlikely to change, even after repeated exposure to incongruous training and testing. Experiment 4 demonstrated that pretraining with unrelated stimulus sets increased the sensitivity of matching-to-sample test performances to incongruous contingencies when they were similar in format to those arranged during pretraining. These data may have implications for a behavior-analytic interpretation of attitude formation and change.     

Task-set inertia, attitude accessibility, and compatibility-order effects: new evidence for a task-set switching account of the implicit association test effect

Based on a task-set switching account of the Implicit Association Test (IAT), the authors predict a specific pattern of aftereffects as a consequence of working through IAT blocks. In Study 1, performance in an evaluative decision task, but not in a color-naming task, was decreased after working through the incompatible rather than compatible block of a flower-insect IAT. In Study 2, response latencies in an evaluative rating task, but not in a color-rating task, were analogously affected, whereas the ratings themselves were not a function of the compatibility of prior IAT blocks. The aftereffects demonstrate reactivity of the IAT; they bear on the mechanisms underlying the IAT and on compatibility-order effects.