Equivalence relations in individuals with language limitations and mental retardation

The study of equivalence relations exhibited by individuals with mental retardation and language limitations holds the promise of providing information of both theoretical and practical significance. We reviewed the equivalence literature with this population, defined in terms of subjects having moderate, severe, or profound mental retardation. The literature includes 55 such individuals, most of whom showed positive outcomes on equivalence tests. The results to date suggest that naming skills are not necessary for positive equivalence test outcomes. Thus far, however, relatively few subjects with minimal language have been studied. Moreover, we suggest that the scientific contributions of studies in this area would be enhanced with better documentation of language skills and other subject characteristics. With recent advances in laboratory procedures for establishing the baseline performances necessary for equivalence tests, this research area is poised for rapid growth.     

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.     

Equivalence class establishment, expansion, and modification in preschool children

Preschool children were taught four two-choice match-to-sample conditional discriminations with 10 arbitrary visual stimuli. For 6 participants, 2 of the 10 stimuli served as the sample, or conditional, stimuli in all discriminations. For 5 additional participants, the same pair of stimuli served as the discriminative, or comparison, stimuli in all discriminations. Equivalence classes were established with more participants in the latter group, replicating prior research with participants with retardation. Four participants, in whom equivalence classes were established and who were available for further participation, were exposed to new conditional discriminations without trial-by-trial feedback and involving some novel and some familiar stimuli. Consistent conditional responding was observed, and tests for inclusion of the novel stimuli in the original classes showed class expansion. Training to reverse the unreinforced conditional performances produced a reversal of class membership in 3 of 4 participants, an outcome not consistent with other studies. The results are discussed with respect to the interaction of class structure and size.     

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.     

Differential effects of seating arrangements on disruptive behavior of fifth grade students during independent seatwork

We investigated teacher versus student seat selection in the context of group and individual seating arrangements. Disruptive behavior during group seating occurred at twice the rate when students chose their seats than when the teacher chose. During individual seating, disruptive behavior occurred more than three times as often when the students chose their seats. The results are discussed in relation to choice and the matching law.     

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.     

新世纪20年国内假设检验及其关联问题的方法学研究

新世纪20年来国内假设检验方法学研究内容可分为如下几类: 零假设显著性检验的不足、p值的使用问题、心理学研究的可重复性问题、效应量、检验力、等效性检验、其他与假设检验关联的研究。零假设显著性检验已经发展成一套组合流程: 为了保证检验力和节省成本, 实验研究需要做先验检验力分析预估样本容量, 但问卷超过160人在传统统计中就没有必要这样做。当拒绝零假设时, 应当结合效应量做出结论。当不拒绝零假设时, 需要报告后验检验力; 如果效应量中或大而检验力不够高, 则可增加被试再行分析, 但这一过程应主动披露, 报告最后的实际p值并对可能犯的第一类错误率做出评估。