Murray Sidman's contributions to clinical behavior analysis

Murray Sidman was not himself a clinician nor directly involved in clinical research. Nevertheless, his experimental and conceptual work, especially in the area of stimulus equivalence, profoundly influenced the development of clinical behavior analysis. Before his work on stimulus equivalence, clinicians with a behavior analytic world view working with verbally sophisticated humans, were making some progress in understanding clinical phenomena and in developing innovative therapies. However, given the obvious and predominant role of verbal processes in both the development and treatment of clinical problems, that progress was constrained by the existing behavior analytic account of verbal behavior. Most fundamentally, it was hard to understand how, in the apparent absence of direct training, verbal events, even novel verbal events, acquire the functions of the nonverbal events that they stand for or represent. Sidman's work on stimulus equivalence, especially the transfer (transformation) of functions, offered an answer and thereby provided a conceptual framework of symbolic behavior around which clinical behavior analysis could cohere and develop.     

The nonequivalence of behavioral and mathematical equivalence.

Sidman and his colleagues derived behavioral tests for stimulus equivalence from the axiom in logic and mathematics that defines a relation of equivalence. The analogy has generated abundant research in which match-to-sample methods have been used almost exclusively to study interesting and complex stimulus control phenomena. It has also stimulated considerable discussion regarding interpretation of the analogy and speculation as to its validity and generality. This article reexamines the Sidman stimulus equivalence analogy in the context of a broader consideration of the mathematical axiom than was included in the original presentation of the analogy and some of the data that have accumulated in the interim. We propose that (a) mathematical and behavioral examples of equivalence relations differ substantially, (b) terminology is being used in ways that can lead to erroneous conclusions about the nature of the stimulus control that develops in stimulus equivalence experiments, and (c) complete analyses of equivalence and other types of stimulus-stimulus relations require more than a simple invocation of the analogy. Implications of our analysis for resolving current issues and prompting new research are discussed.     

Murray Sidman: fostering progress through foundational choices

The contributions of Murray Sidman to the field of behavior analysis have helped to put the field on a progressive path. In this paper we describe three areas as examples, drawn from the larger set of his notable contributions: the analysis of stimulus equivalence in a way that has fostered a behavior-analytic approach to derived stimulus relations and symbolic meaning; the observation and measurement of individual behavior through time; and his stance against punitive applied methods. In each of these areas Sidman was a dedicated behaviorist, avoiding appeals to mentalistic or transcendental forces, opposing hypothetical mediational accounts, and taking a functional and contextual approach. Clarity of assumptions was at the heart of Sidman's effective scientific practices and there is no reason to think that those same assumptions will not carry us further, as evidence mounts in support of these views on psychological research and practice.     

NAMING,THE FORMATION OF STIMULUS CLASSES,AND APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS

The methods used in Sidman's original studies on equivalence classes provide a framework for analyzing functional verbal behavior. Sidman and others have shown how teaching receptive, name-referent matching may produce rudimentary oral reading and word comprehension skills. Eikeseth and Smith (1992) have extended these findings by showing that children with autism may acquire equivalence classes after learning to supply a common oral name to each stimulus in a potential class. A stimulus class analysis suggests ways to examine (a) the problem of programming generalization from teaching situations to other environments, (b) the expansion of the repertoires that occur in those settings, and (c) the use of naming to facilitate these forms of generalization. Such research will help to clarify and extend Horne and Lowe's recent (1996) account of the role of verbal behavior in the formation of stimulus classes.     

Emergence of relations and the essence of learning: a review of Sidman's Equivalence relations and behavior: a research story. Book review

The author reviews and comments on the book Equivalence relations and behavior: a research story by Murray Sidman. Sidman's book reports his research about equivalence relations and competencies in children with mental retardation and how it relates to behavior. Sidman used the idea of stimulus-stimulus relations among features of the environment to develop his theories about equivalence relations. Experimental work with children and animals demonstrated their ability to use equivalence relations to learn new tasks. The subject received feedback and reinforcement for specific choices made during training, then was presented with new choices during testing. Results of the tests indicate that subjects were able to establish relations and retrieve them in different situations.     

Murray Sidman and Patient H. M.: The role of behavior analysis in the emergence of collaborative modern neuroscience

The intersection of the lives of 2 essential individuals in science, behavior analyst Murray Sidman (1923-2019), and Henry G. Molaison also known as Patient H.M. (1926-2008), warrants examination as it highlights the role of behavior analysis and other disciplines in the emergence of modern neuroscience and a collaborative approach to science. This paper describes the historical context and content of two publications by Sidman in which Molaison served as a research participant. The goal of the present paper is to emphasize this little-known facet of Sidman's rich career and to highlight the pioneering role of behavior analysis, and particularly the work of Murray Sidman, in the emergence of collaborative modern neuroscience.     

Citations of Murray Sidman's work in JEAB: Evidence of a long and large contribution

We examined citations of Murray Sidman's publications in the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior from the journal's inception in 1958 through May 2020. On average, he was cited 35.6 times per year. The rate of citation did not change substantially across time and the cumulative citation count was 2,212. His 10 publications cited most often deal with behavior-analytic research methods, stimulus equivalence, and unsignaled free-operant (or Sidman) avoidance. Our data provide clear evidence of the breadth and depth of Sidman's influence on the experimental analysis of behavior across 7 decades. His contributions were both exceptional and praiseworthy and his legacy will long endure.     

Operants Were Never "Emitted," Feeling Is Doing, And Learning Takes Only One Trial: A Review Of B. F. Skinner's Recent Issues In The Analysis Of Behavior

This final collection of Skinner's papers was intended for the professional, although other readers will find much of interest. The first five chapters are devoted to what Skinner called “theoretical issues” and include clear presentations of his positions on “feelings” and on the “self” as an apparent agent of volition. Skinner skillfully discusses thinking, the origins of cognitive-mediational theories, and a favorite topic: the similarity of processes occurring in the histories of species and of individuals. The next four chapters cover what he called “professional issues,” including the often-misunderstood philosophy known as radical behaviorism as well as the operant aspects of behavior therapy and attempts to influence educational practices. He seemed disappointed in the lack of acceptance of programmed learning methods and pessimistic about the possibility of improving education practices. This pessimism was evident in the final section, “personal issues,” in which he expressed doubt that the powerful and self-serving forces of government, business, and religion will ever permit the changes that could be wrought by the application of behavior analysis to the great problems of society. Two other chapters in the last section will be useful to historians who are curious about the influence of logical positivism on Skinner's thinking (apparently there was not much influence) and to sophisticated readers who are interested in Skinner's retrospective consideration of his work.     

Sidman or statistics?

Murray Sidman's statements regarding variability, experimental control, and generality are interwoven with examples from the literature on conditional discrimination. Sidman's position was that statistical inferences from group studies produce no information about the behavior of individual subjects and that statistical treatment of individual subject data masks variability which may represent conditions that are not controlled. Sidman's work on conditional discrimination provides excellent examples of how complex discriminations should be examined in detail with accuracy levels obtained for each type of discrimination within an experiment. Sidman made important contributions to the foundation of behavior analysis with extensive basic research as well as applications of methods and principles to clinical and educational settings.     

Tactical contingencies in the experimental analysis of reinforcement and operant classes

In his “Tactics of Scientific Research” (1960), his work on avoidance, his discovery of equivalence classes and his cautions on applications of coercion, Murray Sidman created high standards for behavior analytic research. I illustrate his influence in the context of three examples he might have characterized as pilot studies. Each examined trial N+1 response probabilities depending on whether trial N responding had produced a reinforcer. Differentially reinforced interresponse times, keys pecked in arbitrary matching, and two-key response sequences provided no robust evidence that reinforcing some response property on trial N raises the probability of responding with that property on trial N+1. These negative findings shed light on the nature of operant classes and on the relation of reinforcers to the responses that produced them. Through selection, reinforcers create operant classes and engender variations of the responses within those classes; operant classes are held together by common contingencies. Sidman extended our understanding of operant classes by expanding them to include equivalence relations.     

Murray Sidman: A life of giving

Murray Sidman's contributions to the science of behavior span many areas including avoidance behavior, coercion and its effects, stimulus control, errorless learning, programmed learning, stimulus equivalence, and single-subject methodology. He was also a great mentor to many and helped shape the discipline we now call behavior analysis. In this memoriam, we briefly highlight his scholarly legacy and share some personal anecdotes.     

Do common elements predict class merger: A test of Sidman's theory of equivalence

The study presented here investigated the effect of common and uncommon elements on class merger as predicted by Sidman in his reconceptualization of stimulus equivalence suggesting that common elements among contingencies can facilitate emergent performances (1994, 1997, 2000). Eight adult participants were exposed to a procedure that arranged for stimulus–reinforcer correlations in Phase 1 and response–reinforcer correlations in Phase 2 of a 3-phase study. In the common element group, the visual images serving as reinforcers were the same in Phase 1 and Phase 2. In the uncommon elements group, the images serving as reinforcers were different in Phases 1 and 2. In Phase 3, participants were given an opportunity to respond but no feedback was programmed. The results showed that participants' responding was well differentiated in the common element group and undifferentiated in the uncommon elements group. These results are predicted by Sidman's revised formulation of the provenance and scope of equivalence relations. Specifically, these data support Sidman's (1994, 1997, 2000) suggestion that elements of a contingency enter into an equivalence class and common elements among contingencies are sufficient to produce class mergers. The findings highlight an emergent simple discrimination and raise some interesting considerations about the definition of equivalence under the new formulation.     

A retrospective 60-year review of Murray Sidman's Tactics of Scientific Research and some of its influence on behavior analysis

Murray Sidman's book, Tactics of Scientific Research: Evaluating Experimental Data in Psychology, published in 1960, has been called the bible of the experimental analysis of behavior and has been a major influence on basic as well as applied research in behavior analysis. The contents of the early reviews of the book are summarized and the commemoration in The Behavior Analyst at the 30^th anniversary of the book is reviewed along with Sidman's comments on updates that he would have made if he were to revise or supplement the book. Included are some later remarks by Sidman regarding specific issues in Tactics. Continuous rates of citations are displayed and show the sustained relevance of the book, and selected themes from the book are discussed. Finally, experiences from using Tactics in lab courses and in graduate-level courses on scientific method are recapitulated, including questions raised by students, and Sidman's answers to those questions. Tactics is a true classic in behavior analysis.     

Conceptualization in the pigeon: What do we know?

This article reviews studies on conceptual behaviour in the pigeon that have been conducted over the past four decades. These studies reveal a variety of definitions and procedures employed in the assessment of this behaviour, a reflection of its multifaceted nature. Overall, pigeons have been found capable of categorizing a wide variety of static and moving natural and artificial stimuli. They have also demonstrated learning of abstract or relational concepts, even though such concepts seem to be more challenging. More recently, pigeons have also been shown to be capable of conceptualization as reflected in the ability to form functional or contingency classes (Lea, 1984), and some preliminary findings point to the possibility that pigeons can exhibit the more demanding equivalence classes (Sidman, 1990) that manifest themselves in the formal properties of reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity emerging from conditional discriminations, when adequate procedures are employed. Available evidence now seems to suggest that functional and equivalence classes are closely related, but more work is needed to specify the nature of this relationship. At this point, it seems safe to conclude that language may not be necessary for conceptualization, including equivalence learning. Taken together, the findings of this review reveal learning abilities in the pigeon far beyond simple discrimination or categorization, although it is not yet well understood how this learning is achieved. Memorization of individual stimuli, featural analysis, and formation of prototypes have all been suggested as strategies utilized by pigeons in perceptual categorization tasks, while abstraction has been posited in explaining pigeons' relational concept learning. The reinforcement contingency has more recently been offered as a possible mechanism underlying equivalence learning. More broadly, the review illustrates how a hybrid of psychological and biological approaches can be employed in animal experimentation to tackle complex questions and enhance our understanding of behaviour and cognition.     

On the origins of naming and other symbolic behavior

We identify naming as the basic unit of verbal behavior, describe the conditions under which it is learned, and outline its crucial role in the development of stimulus classes and, hence, of symbolic behavior. Drawing upon B. F. Skinner's functional analysis and the theoretical work of G. H. Mead and L. S. Vygotsky, we chart how a child, through learning listener behavior and then echoic responding, learns bidirectional relations between classes of objects or events and his or her own speaker-listener behavior, thus acquiring naming-a higher order behavioral relation. Once established, the bidirectionality incorporated in naming extends across behavior classes such as those identified by Skinner as the mand, tact, and intraverbal so that each becomes a variant of the name relation. We indicate how our account informs the specification of rule-governed behavior and provides the basis for an experimental analysis of symbolic behavior. Furthermore, because naming is both evoked by, and itself evokes, classes of events it brings about new or emergent behavior such as that reported in studies of stimulus equivalence. This account is supported by data from a wide range of match-to-sample studies that also provide evidence that stimulus equivalence in humans is not a unitary phenomenon but the outcome of a number of different types of naming behavior.     

The importance of multiple exemplar instruction in the establishment of novel verbal behavior

According to traditional linguistic accounts language, and its generative nature, cannot be taught. From a behavior analytic perspective, language is like any other behavior; it is learned and amenable to change. Based upon Skinner's radical behavioral analysis of verbal behavior, specific procedures have been designed to promote novel verbal relations. However, despite the strength and utility of this approach, using behavioral principles to understand the generativity of language has been challenging. Dependent upon the specific theory (e.g., stimulus equivalence, relational frame theory, bidirectional naming) within the radical behavioral orientation, researchers arrange unique procedures to evaluate the variables responsible for this phenomenon. This paper presents the commonalities and differences of two procedures (i.e., multiple exemplar training, multiple exemplar instruction) with examples of research highlighting the use of both in producing generativity. Further, it describes how multiple exemplar instruction is independent from other procedures leading to this outcome, and concludes by providing recommendations for both research and practice.     

Quantitative and methodological aspects of stimulus equivalence

The number of different ways of linking stimuli in the training phase of a conditional discrimination procedure designed to teach equivalence relations has hitherto been underestimated. An algorithm from graph theory that produces the correct number of such different ways is given. The establishment of equivalence relations requires transitive stimulus control. A misconception in a previous analysis of the conditions necessary for demonstrating transitive stimulus control is indicated. This misconception concerns responding in an unreinforced test trial to a negative rather than a positive comparison stimulus. Such behavior cannot be attributed to discriminative control by degree of association with reinforcement if the negative comparison stimulus has been less associated with reinforcement than the positive comparison stimulus in an antecedent training phase.     

Behavior analysis and decision making

Behavior analysts have developed powerful methodologies to assess central phenomena in areas that have been dominated by cognitive psychologists. Advances in instructional control, stimulus equivalence, choice, rule-governed behavior, matching to sample, and verbal behavior are some of the tools that have been developed in the experimental analysis of behavior. Although the article focuses on the experimental analysis of reasoning, this is but one of the areas in which behavior analysts should have a greater impact on contemporary psychology.     

Behaviorism Makes Its Debut: A Review of Lattal and Chase's Behavior Theory and Philosophy

Behavior Theory and Philosophy, masterfully edited by Lattal and Chase, is a collection of 21 papers by major behaviorists, presented and discussed at a conference on the intersection of philosophy and behavior analysis held at West Virginia University in 2000. The chapters in Part I are devoted to philosophy of science (causality, constructs, theory, explanation, reductionism) and the relations among behavior analysis and several contemporary philosophical movements (humanism, empiricism, pragmatism, selectionism, analytic philosophy). Part II examines behavior‐analytic interpretations of mentalistic concepts (intention, imagination, ethics, cognition). Part III presents extensions and applications of basic research in behavior analysis (verbal behavior, creativity, development, education, disability, and corporate culture). The publication of this book signals that behaviorism has developed mature philosophical foundations.