Critical thinking in North America: A new theory of knowledge,learning, and literacy

The pace of change in the world is accelerating, yet educational institutions have not kept pace. Indeed, schools have historically been the most static of social institutions, uncritically passing down from generation to generation outmoded didactic, lecture-and-drill-based, models of instruction. Predictable results follow. Students, on the whole, do not learn how to work by, or think for, themselves. They do not learn how to gather, analyze, synthesize and assess information. They do not learn how to analyze the diverse logic of the questions and problems they face and hence how to adjust their thinking to those problems. They do not learn how to enter sympathetically into the thinking of others, nor how to deal rationally with conflicting points of view. They do not learn to become critical readers, writers, speakers and listeners. They do not learn how to use their native languages clearly, precisely, or persuasively. They do not, therefore, become literate, in the proper sense of the word. Neither do they gain much in the way of genuine knowledge since, for the most part, they could not explain the basis for what they believe. They would be hard pressed to explain, for example, which of their beliefs were based on rational assent and which on simple conformity to what they have been told. They have little sense as to how they might critically analyze their own experience, or identify national or group bias in their own thinking. They are much more apt to learn on the basis of irrational than rational modes of thought. They lack the traits of mind of a genuinely educated person: intellectual humility, courage, integrity, perseverance, and faith in reason.Happily, there is a movement in education today striving to address these problems in a global way, with strategies and materials for the modification of instruction at all levels of education. At its foundation is an emerging new theory of knowledge, learning, and literacy, one which recognizes the centrality of independent critical thinking to all substantial learning, one which recognizes that higher-order, multilogical thinking is as important to childhood as to adult learning, and as important to foundational learning in monological as in multilogical disciplines. This educational reform movement is not proposing an educational miracle cure, for its leading proponents recognize that many social and historical forces must come together before the ideals of the critical thinking movement will become a full academic reality. Schools do not exist in a social vacuum. To the extent that the broader society is uncritical so, on the whole, will be society's schools. Nevertheless, the social conditions necessary for fundamental changes in schooling are increasingly apparent. The pressure for fundamental change is growing. Whether and to what extent these needed basic changes will be delayed or side-tracked, thus requiring new periodic resurgences of this movement, with new, more elaborate articulations of its ideals, goals, and methods — only time will tell.     

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.     

Resurgence of derived stimulus relations.

Resurgence has been shown in human and nonhuman operant behavior, but not in derived relational responses. The present study examined this issue. Twenty-three undergraduates were trained to make conditional discriminations in a three-choice matching-to-sample paradigm. The training resulted in three equivalence classes, each consisting of four arbitrarily configured visual stimuli. The same 12 stimuli were then reorganized, and the conditional discrimination training was repeated such that three new classes were possible. In a subsequent test of derived relations, most subjects showed response patterns that were consistent with the altered conditional discriminations. Subjects were then exposed to conditional discrimination trials under extinction. Most subjects continued to respond consistently with the most recently reinforced conditional discrimination trials. During the next phase, subjects were exposed to symmetry and equivalence trials. Responses consistent with the most recent training produced feedback saying that the responses were incorrect, whereas other responses produced no feedback. Most subjects showed a resurgence of responding that was consistent with their earlier training. Finally, subjects were exposed to conditional discrimination trials carried out in extinction. Most subjects continued to show a resurgence of responding that was consistent with their early training.     

Speed analyses of stimulus equivalence.

The functional substitutability of stimuli in equivalence classes was examined through analyses of the speed of college students'' accurate responding. After training subjects to respond to 18 conditional relations, subjects'' accuracy and speed of accurate responding were compared across trial types (baseline, symmetry, transitivity, and combined transitivity and symmetry) and nodal distance (one- through five-node transitive and combined transitive and symmetric relations). Differences in accuracy across nodal distance and trial type were significant only on the first tests of equivalence, whereas differences in speed were significant even after extended testing. Response speed was inversely related to the number of nodes on which the tested relations were based. Significant differences in response speed were also found across trial types, except between transitivity and combined trials. To determine the generality of these comparisons, three groups of subjects were included: An instructed group was given an instruction that specified the interchangeability of stimuli related through training; a queried group was queried about the basis for test-trial responding: and a standard group was neither instructed nor queried. There were no significant differences among groups. These results suggest the use of response speed and response accuracy to measure the strength of matching relations.     

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.     

The effects of nodality on the formation of equivalence classes

A four-member equivalence class (A → B → C → D) can be formed by training AB, BC, and CD. The nodal stimuli, B and C, mediate all of the derivative (transitive and equivalence) relations in the class. The derivative relations AC, CA, BD, and DB are separated by one node, whereas AD and DA are separated by two nodes. How do the number of nodes that separate the stimuli in a derivative relation influence the induction of stimulus control exerted by that relation? Seven college students learned two four-member classes made up of nonsense syllables. After training, all derivative relations were presented repeatedly without informative feedback. Stimulus control exerted by each derivative relation was assessed concurrently. For the 7 subjects, control exerted by the derivative relations increased gradually with repeated presentations. With 6 of the 7 subjects, the one-node relations exerted more control than the two-node relations during the process. However, the disparity between the one- and two-node relations decreased with repeated presentations. Eventually, all derivative relations exerted complete control. The control exerted by derivative relations during induction was inversely related to the number of nodes separating the terms in the derivative relations. These results demonstrate that nodal distance is a determinant of the relatedness of stimuli in equivalence classes. The findings are discussed in terms of remote association, semantic memory networks, and the study of transitive inference.     

A test of symmetry and transitivity in the conditional discrimination performances of pigeons

In a matching-to-sample context, pigeons were taught two conditional discriminations according to one of three equivalence paradigms: train if A, then select B and if B, then select C; train if B, then A and if B, then C; or train if A, then B and if C, then B. Test trials without reinforcement revealed that the conditional relations did not satisfy the symmetrical and transitive properties of an equivalence relation. Apparently, only specific if... then relations were learned. Contrary to Kendall's (1983) findings, and probably as a consequence of procedural differences, none of the pigeons in the present experiment were observed to emit mediating behavior during the transitivity probe trials. The absence of symmetry and transitivity may be related to the individual stimuli not being reflexive. Behavioral techniques other than the commonly used matching-to-sample technique might better succeed in avoiding unintended stimulus control in the study of the formation of stimulus classes.     

Nonhumans have not yet shown stimulus equivalence

Recently, two published articles have reported finding stimulus equivalence in nonhumans. One suggested that equivalence was due to the mediation of names. The procedure used trained all components of all tested relations. Because nothing was derived, the defining characteristics of equivalence were not achieved. In the second study a definition of equivalence was proposed that fails to distinguish functional stimulus classes from equivalence classes. The resulting data are not clearly relevant to stimulus equivalence in Sidman's sense of the term. Stimulus equivalence has not yet been shown in nonhumans.     

Choice behavior of rats in a concurrent-chains schedule: Amount and delay of reinforcement

Rats were exposed to concurrent-chains schedules in which the terminal links were equal fixed-interval schedules terminating in one or three food pellets. Choice proportions for large reward increased with increases in delay intervals programmed on fixed-interval schedules and supported the predictions derived from a general choice model originally formulated by Fantino and later developed by Navarick and Fantino. In addition, a functional equivalence of two alternatives was established by increasing delay intervals with large reward, whereas delay intervals for small reward were held constant. Functionally equivalent delay intervals with large reward, for each delay interval with small reward, can be described by a power function with exponent smaller than 1.0. A better prediction of choice proportions resulted when this function was used to derive predicted choice proportions.