Nodal structure and the partitioning of equivalence classes

By definition, all of the stimuli in an equivalence class have to be functionally interchangeable with each other. The present experiment, however, demonstrated that this was not the case when using post-class-formation dual-option response transfer tests. With college students, two 4-node 6-member equivalence classes with nodal structures of A-->B-->C-->D-->E-->F were produced by training AB, BC, CD, DE, and EF. Then, unique responses were trained to the C and D stimuli in each class. The responses trained to C generalized to B and A, while the responses trained to D generalized to E and F. Thus, each 4-node 6-member equivalence class was bifurcated into two 3-member functional classes: A-->B-->C and D-->E-->F, with class membership precisely predicted by nodal structure. A final emergent relations test documented the intactness of the underlying 4-node 6-member equivalence classes. The coexistence of the interchangeability of stimuli in an equivalence class and the bifurcation of such a class in terms of nodal structure was explained in the following manner. The conditional discriminations that are used to establish a class also imposes a nodal structure on the stimuli in the class. Thus, the stimuli in the class acquire two sets of relational properties. If the format of a test trial allows only one response option per class, responding on those trials will be in accordance with class membership and will not express the effects of nodal distance. If the format of a test trial allows more than one response option per class, responding on those trials will be determined by the nodal structure of the class. Thus, the relational properties expressed by the stimuli in an equivalence class are determined by the discriminative function served by the format of a test trial.     

On the origins of emergent differential sample behavior

Two experiments evaluated the source(s) of emergent differential sample behavior in pigeons. Initially, pigeons learned two-sample, two-alternative symbolic matching in which different patterns of sample responding were required to produce the comparisons. Afterwards, two other samples nominally identical to the comparisons were added to the matching task. On new-sample trials, completion of either sample-response requirement produced comparison alternatives which were either the same as or different from the alternatives on the familiar-sample trials. Differential responding to the new samples developed only when the comparisons were the same as the familiar samples. The results are consistent with acquired sample equivalence and adventitious reinforcement accounts of emergent sample behavior and are inconsistent with bidirectional transfer (symmetry) between the response patterns explicitly required to the originally trained (familiar) samples and the subsequently reinforced comparisons.     

Is Educational Research Any Use?

We begin by examining the widespread scepticism about the value of empirical educational research that is found within sections of the philosophy of education community. We argue that this scepticism, in its strongest form, is incoherent as it suggests that there are no educational facts susceptible of discovery. On the other hand, if there are such facts, then commonsense is not an adequate way of accessing them, due to its own contested and variable nature. We go on to examine the claim that teaching is a moral enterprise whose successful pursuit demands the grasp of moral concepts and their implications. We show that while this is the case, it is a necessary, not a sufficient condition for successful teaching, which also requires a grasp of facts that are relevant to effective teaching and learning. Finally we examine some protocols for educational research. John Gingell, John Gingell is head of philosophy programmes at the University of Northampton, UK. He is the author, with Ed Brandon, of ‘In Defence of High Culture’ (Blackwell 2000) and (with Christopher Winch) ‘Philosophy and Education Policy: a critical introduction’ (Routledge 2004). Christopher Winch teaches at King’s College, London, UK. He is the author of ‘The Philosophy of Human Learning’ (Routledge 1998) and ‘Education, Autonomy and Critical Thinking’ (Routledge, forthcoming, 2005).     

Dimensionality of individualism–collectivism and measurement equivalence of Triandis and Gelfand’s scale

Despite researchers’ strong interest in individualism and collectivism (I–C), the conceptualization and measurement of I–C constructs remain controversial. Through a cross-cultural study, the present research examines the dimensionality of I–C and tests equivalence of a measurement scale recently developed by Triandis and Gelfand. Through confirmatory factor analyses, the authors find that conceiving I–C as separate constructs with multiple dimensions is superior and better fits the data. The measurement scale developed based on such a conceptualization is found warrantable although refinements can be made. The results suggest a need for future research on further testing the dimensionality and measurement of the individualism and collectivism scale.     

西方人格工具在中国:文化的思考——以多元文化人格问卷为例

本文以多元文化人格问卷在中国施测的结果为例,从中国文化的角度,探讨中国文化对语言等值和功能等值的影响,如时间观、面子观、关系观、人际沟通观、谦虚观等对项目的具体影响,思考西方人格工具在中国应用时遭遇的文化冲撞.     

BEAUTY IN THE LIVING WORLD

Almost all admit that there is beauty in the natural world. Many suspect that such beauty is more than an adornment of nature. Few in our contemporary world suggest that this beauty is an empirical principle of the natural world itself and instead relegate beauty to the eye and mind of the beholder. Guided by theological and scientific insight, the authors propose that such exclusion is no longer tenable, at least in the data of modern biology and in our view of the natural world in general. More important, we believe an empirical aesthetics exists that can help guide experimental design and development of computational models in biology. Moreover, because theology and science can both contribute toward and equally profit from such an aesthetics, we propose that this empirical aesthetics provides the foundation for a living synergy between theology and science.     

Identifiability and Equivalence of GLLIRM Models

The generalized logit–linear item response model (GLLIRM) is a linearly constrained nominal categories model (NCM) that computes the scale and intercept parameters for categories as a weighted sum of basic parameters. This paper addresses the problems of the identifiability of the basic parameters and the equivalence between different GLLIRM models. It is shown that the identifiability of the basic parameters depends on the size and rank of the coefficient matrix of the linear functions. Moreover, two models are observationally equivalent if the product of the respective coefficient matrices has full column rank. Finally, the paper also explores the relations between the parameters of nested models. I would like to express my gratitude to the editor and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions on earlier versions of the paper. This work was supported by the Comunidad de Madrid (Spain) grant: CCG07-UAM/ESP-1615.     

Producing and Recognizing Analogical Relations

Analogical reasoning is an important component of intelligent behavior, and a key test of any approach to human language and cognition. Only a limited amount of empirical work has been conducted from a behavior analytic point of view, most of that within Relational Frame Theory (RFT), which views analogy as a matter of deriving relations among relations. The present series of four studies expands previous work by exploring the applicability of this model of analogy to topography-based rather than merely selection-based responses and by extending the work into additional relations, including nonsymmetrical ones. In each of the four studies participants pretrained in contextual control over nonarbitrary stimulus relations of sameness and opposition, or of sameness, smaller than, and larger than, learned arbitrary stimulus relations in the presence of these relational cues and derived analogies involving directly trained relations and derived relations of mutual and combinatorial entailment, measured using a variety of productive and selection-based measures. In Experiment 1 participants successfully recognized analogies among stimulus networks containing same and opposite relations; in Experiment 2 analogy was successfully used to extend derived relations to pairs of novel stimuli; in Experiment 3 the procedure used in Experiment 1 was extended to nonsymmetrical comparative relations; in Experiment 4 the procedure used in Experiment 2 was extended to nonsymmetrical comparative relations. Although not every participant showed the effects predicted, overall the procedures occasioned relational responses consistent with an RFT account that have not yet been demonstrated in a behavior-analytic laboratory setting, including productive responding on the basis of analogies.     

An investigation of the psychometric evidence of CBM-R passage equivalence: Utility of readability statistics and equating for alternate forms

Claims have been made that grade appropriate curriculum-based measurement of reading (CBM-R) passages are of comparable difficulty and can be used interchangeably to monitor student progress. Empirical evidence to support claims of equivalence has been lacking. This research investigated the basis for making claims of equivalence. The use of readability statistics to justify passage equivalence was found to be lacking. Using a general measurement model for congeneric tests, CBM-R passages were found to measure a single latent factor with a high degree of reliability. However, evidence indicated that the raw scores, words read correctly per minute, across passages did not provide equivalent measurements. Statistical equating was investigated as an approach to overcome the lack of equivalence with promising results.     

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.