The nature of control by spoken words over visual stimulus selection.

Eight retarded adolescents were trained to select one (a trained S+) of two visual stimuli in response to a spoken word (a trained word). Two different visual stimuli alternated randomly as the S-. To determine if the spoken work was merely a temporal discriminative stimulus for when to respond, or if it also specified which visual stimulus to select, the subjects were given intermittent presentations of untrained (novel) spoken words. All subjects consistently selected the trained S+ in response to the trained spoken word and selected the previous S- in response to the untrained spoken words. It was hypothesized that the subjects were responding away from the trained S+ in response to untrained spoken words, and control by untrained spoken words would not be observed when the trained S+ was not present. The two visual S- stimuli selected on trials of untrained spoken words were presented simultaneously. The untrained spoken words presented on these trials no longer controlled stimulus selections for seven subjects. The results supported the hypothesis that previous control by spoken words was due to responding away from the trained S+ in response to untrained spoken words.     

Control of pigeons' pecking by trace stimuli

In Experiment I, pigeons' pecking a white key was reinforced with grain when white was immediately preceded by a vertical white line on a green surround, but not by green alone. This procedure produced control of pecking by the line. Next, pecking white was reinforced after vertical line on green, but not after green alone or other orientations of the white line on green. The line-tilt dimension initially did not control pecking, a result that showed that interdimensional (line versus no line) training does not always result in dimensional control. Line-tilt control was eventually established but was accompanied by a decrease in interdimensional control. In Experiment II, interdimensional training, with or without a trace interval intervening between line on green or green alone and white, was followed by tests for line-tilt control. While interdimensional control was unaffected by the trace interval, line-tilt control tended to be less with the trace interval. This dissociation of interdimensional and dimensional control, as well as the failure of interdimensional training to produce dimensional control in Experiment I, suggests that the line stimulus is multidimensional.     

Choice, time allocation, and response rate during stimulus generalization

Six pigeons were trained to discriminate between two noise intensities using a procedure that assessed choice, time allocation, and response rate simultaneously and independently. Responses on the left or right key (R1 or R2) were respectively correct in the presence of two different intensities, S1 and S2. After a correct response, reinforcement became available for pecks on the center key. Reinforcement density for R1¦S1 relative to R2¦S2 was varied across experimental conditions. Generalization tests followed extensive training at each condition. As a function of stimulus intensity, proportions of initial choices of R2, of time spent in R2-initiated components, and of center-key responses emitted in R2-initiated components all yielded sigmoidal gradients of similar slope, which shifted slightly in location when relative reinforcement density changed. Changeovers were maximal where initial choice proportions approximated 0.5. Gradients relating the absolute number of center-key responses to stimulus intensity were also roughly sigmoidal, but were more sensitive to changes in reinforcement density. Gradients of momentary response rate also depended on reinforcement density. During training, large but transitory shifts in choice responding occurred when reinforcement density changed, while differences in momentary response rate developed slowly, suggesting separate control of choice and response rate by the contingencies of reinforcement.     

Contextual control of equivalence-based transformation of functions

The transformation of functions refers to the untrained acquisition of stimulus functions among members of stimulus equivalence classes or relational frames. Although it is widely assumed that contextual control over the transformation of fuctions must exist, this has not yet been conclusively demonstrated in laboratory studies. Four experiments are reported in which (a) stimulus equivalence classes were established, (b) a conditional stimulus function was trained for one member of each of the classes, and (c) multiple-exemplar procedures were used to train and test for contextual control over the transformation of the stimulus function within the classes and to assess whether it generalized to new equivalence classes. Although a significant amount of training was required, the procedures ultimately resulted in the contextual control of function transformation for 9 of 10 participants and generalized contextual control for 4 of 5 participants.     

Stimulus control topographies and tests of symmetry in pigeons

Pigeons were tested for symmetry after A-B training under conditions designed to avoid problems that may prevent its emergence, namely the change of stimulus location in testing relative to training and the lack of requisite discrimination training. In Experiment 1, samples appeared in two locations during baseline training to minimize the impact of stimulus location. Experiments 2 and 3 included multiple-location training along with additional identity and symbolic matching training, respectively, to explicitly train all of the simultaneous and successive stimulus discriminations required for testing. Experiment 4 provided reinforcement for symmetrical matching relations with some stimulus sets (with multiple-location training) prior to symmetry testing with different sets. In all experiments, pigeons showed no evidence of symmetry despite the fact that baseline (A-B) matching transferred to novel locations. Additional tests for reflexivity (Experiment 2) yielded similar outcomes. These results indicate that the change in stimulus location is not the sole reason that pigeons do not show symmetry and increase the plausibility of arguments that symmetry and other indexes of stimulus equivalence may be beyond the capabilities of the pigeon.     

Naming and categorization in young children: vocal tact training

In three experiments, 2- to 4-year-old children, following pretraining with everyday objects, were presented with arbitrary stimuli of differing shapes. In Experiment 1A, 9 subjects were trained one common tact response, "zag," to three of these and a second tact, "vek," to another three. In category match-to-sample Test 1, 4 subjects sorted accurately when required only to look at the sample before selecting from five comparisons. The remaining 5 subjects succeeded in Test 2, in which they were required to tact the sample before selecting comparisons. Experiment 1B showed, for 2 of these subjects, that tact training with 12 arbitrary stimuli established two six-member classes that were still intact 6 weeks later. In Experiment 2, 3 new subjects participated in a common tact training procedure that ensured that none of the exemplars from the same class were presented together prior to the test for three-member classes. Two subjects passed category Test 1 and the third passed Test 2. Tests showed subjects' listener behavior in response to hearing /zog/ and /vek/ to be in place. These experiments indicate that common naming is effective in establishing arbitrary stimulus classes and that category match-to-sample testing provides a robust measure of categorization.     

Testing for symmetry in the conditional discriminations of language-trained chimpanzees

If subjects are taught to match Stimulus A to B and then, without further training, match B to A, they have passed a test of symmetry. It has been suggested that non-humans' lack of success on symmetry tests might be overcome by giving them a history of symmetry exemplar training, that is, by directly teaching a large number of conditional relations (e.g., AB, CD, EF,...) and also directly training the "reverse" of these relations (e.g., BA, DC, FE,...). The chimpanzee subjects of the present study, Sherman, Austin, and Lana, had already received extensive symmetry exemplar training as a result of attempts to teach a selection-based language system of lexigrams. The present study systematically subjected 2 of these chimps (Sherman and Lana), for the first time, to standard symmetry tests in controlled conditions. Both chimps failed the tests, even when their correct responses on test trials were reinforced. The findings do not support the exemplar training hypothesis, and cast doubt upon whether the chimps can pass tests of stimulus equivalence.     

Treatment of covert food stealing in an individual with Prader-Willi syndrome

Covert food stealing is common among individuals with Prader-Willi syndrome. We found that verbal reprimands, delivered contingent upon eating prohibited foods, were sufficient to decrease the food stealing of a girl with Prader-Willi syndrome. Warning stimuli were then used to help her discriminate between permitted and prohibited foods during sessions in which food stealing was not directly observed. This procedure resulted in decreases in food stealing from containers labeled with the warning stimuli.     

Further evaluation of low-ranked items in stimulus-choice preference assessments

The generality of the findings reported by DeLeon, Iwata, and Roscoe (1997) was examined by conducting two stimulus-choice preference assessments, the second of which evaluated low-ranked items from the initial assessment. Results for the 2 participants suggested that supplementary assessments of low-ranked items may be useful for identifying a wider variety of reinforcing stimuli.     

Equivalence relations and the reinforcement contingency

Where do equivalence relations come from? One possible answer is that they arise directly from the reinforcement contingency. That is to say, a reinforcement contingency produces two types of outcome: (a) 2‐, 3‐, 4‐, 5‐, or n‐term units of analysis that are known, respectively, as operant reinforcement, simple discrimination, conditional discrimination, second‐order conditional discrimination, and so on; and (b) equivalence relations that consist of ordered pairs of all positive elements that participate in the contingency. This conception of the origin of equivalence relations leads to a number of new and verifiable ways of conceptualizing equivalence relations and, more generally, the stimulus control of operant behavior. The theory is also capable of experimental disproof.