Dermot Barnes

Equivalence class formation in non-hearing impaired children and hearing impaired children

The relationship between verbal behavior and stimulus equivalence was examined using three sets of children differing in chronological age and verbal ability: (1) non-hearing impaired three and four year olds who had verbal skills generally consistent with their chronological ages; (2) partially hearing (severe to profoundly deaf) children who were rated with verbal ages of above 2 years; and (3) partially hearing children (also severely to profoundly deaf) who were rated with verbal ages of below 2 years. All children were taught a series of four conditional discriminations using unfamiliar stimuli. The children were then tested to determine whether classes of equivalent stimuli had formed. Although all the children were able to learn the conditional discriminations equally well and all the verbally-able children (normal and partially hearing) formed equivalence classes, only one of the verbally-impaired children reliably demonstrated stimulus equivalence formation. These results are consistent with the suggestion that stimulus equivalence and human verbal behavior are closely related.

A Transfer of Functions and a Conditional Transfer of Functions through Equivalence Relations in Three- to Six-Year-Old Children

Six children, aged between 3 years and 6 years were trained to form two, three member equivalence relations (A1-B1-C1 and A2-B2-C2). Clapping was then reinforced in the presence of B1, and waving was reinforced in the presence of B2. During testing, all children showed the predicted transfer of discriminative functions through equivalence to the C stimuli (i.e., C1 evoked clapping and C2 evoked waving). Three control subjects of similar ages, who were trained in the conditional discriminations and tested for equivalence using different arbitrary stimuli for C1 and C2, failed to show this transfer of functions. All nine children (six experimental and three control) were also exposed to conditional discriminative function training. That is, clapping was reinforced when B1 was presented in the presence of the spoken word “Yellow,” and waving was reinforced when B1 was presented in the presence of the spoken word “Blue.” In contrast, waving was reinforced when B2 was presented in the presence of the spoken word “Yellow,” and clapping was reinforced when B2 was presented in the presence of the spoken word “Blue.” During testing, the contextual stimuli were presented in visual form only. Two four-year-old children and one six-year-old child (experimental subjects) showed the predicted conditional transfer of control through equivalence relations to the C stimuli (Yellow/C1→cllapping, Blue/C1→waving, Yellow/ C2→waving, and Blue/C2→clapping), whereas the four- and six-year-old control subjects did not. The three-year-old subjects (both control and experimental) refused to complete the study.

Arbitrarily Applicable Relational Responding and Sexual Categorization: A Critical Test of the Derived Difference Relation

The major aim of the current study was to demonstrate that preexperimentally established verbal functions can be examined, and transferred to arbitrary stimuli, using the procedures adopted by relational frame theory. Ten subjects were first exposed to relational pretraining, similar to that employed by Steele and Hayes (1991), in order to establish the relational functions of SAME, OPPOSITE, and DIFFERENT in three arbitrary stimuli. Subjects were then trained in the following relations: SAME/S1- DOMINATE, DIFFERENT/S1-FORGET, OPPOSITE/S1-SUBMIT, SAME/S1-X1, DIFFERENT/S1-X2, and OPPOSITE/S1-X3. Testing involved presenting the subjects with PENIS or VAGINA as samples and X1, X2, X3, and a question mark as comparisons (subjects were instructed to choose the question mark if they felt that none of the other comparisons were correct). All subjects consistently chose X1 given PENIS in the presence of SAME but X3 in the presence of OPPOSITE. Similarly, they chose X3 given VAGINA in the presence of the SAME contextual cue, but chose X1 in the presence of OPPOSITE. Four of the ten subjects chose X2 in the presence of DIFFERENT, given either PENIS or VAGINA as a sample. The six remaining subjects chose the question mark on these tasks, thus indicating that the relation between X2 and PENIS was unspecified. Five of the subjects were exposed to an additional test in which AMNESIA was presented as a sample. In the presence of SAME, three subjects consistently chose the question mark, whereas two subjects consistently chose X2. In the presence of DIFFERENT, subjects consistently chose either X1 or X3. Finally, in the presence of OPPOSITE, subjects consistently chose the question mark. These data support a relational frame account of sexual categorization.

Relating Equivalence Relations to Equivalence Relations: A Relational Framing Model of Complex Human Functioning

The current study aimed to develop a behavior-analytic model of analogical reasoning. In Experiments 1 and 2 subjects (adults and children) were trained and tested for the formation of four, three-member equivalence relations using a delayed matching-to-sample procedure. All subjects (Experiments 1 and 2) were exposed to tests that examined relations between equivalence and non-equivalence relations. For example, on an equivalence-equivalence relation test, the complex sample B1/C1 and the two complex comparisons B3/C3 and B3/C4 were used, and on a nonequivalence-nonequivalence relation test the complex sample B1/C2 was presented with the same two comparisons. All subjects consistently related equivalence relations to equivalence relations and nonequivalence relations to nonequivalence relations (e.g., picked B3/C3 in the presence of B1/Cl and picked B3/C4 in the presence of B1/C2). In Experiment 3, the equivalence responding, the equivalence-equivalence responding, and the nonequivalence-nonequivalence responding was successfully brought under contextual control. Finally, it was shown that the contextual cues could function successfully as comparisons, and the complex samples and comparisons could function successfully as contextual cues and samples, respectively. These data extend the equivalence paradigm and contribute to a behaviour-analytic interpretation of analogical reasoning and complex human functioning, in general.

Radical Behaviorism, Stimulus Equivalence, and Human Cognition

The current paper represents an attempt to clarify the nature of the radical behaviorist’s perspective on human cognition. This attempt will involve an examination of recent behavioral research into the relationship between stimulus equivalence phenomena and symbolic behavior, and language more generally. This form of behavior analysis is offered as an alternative to, but not a replacement for, other methodological and conceptual approaches to psychology.

Stimulus equivalence and connectionism: Implications for behavior analysis and cognitive science.

Recent developments in behavior analysis and cognitive science can be used to improve the uneasy relationship between these two approaches to psychological inquiry. Stimulus equivalence phenomena demonstrate the power of behavior analytic procedures to induce complex generative performances that are typically studied by cognitive scientists, while connectionism challenges the previously dominant symbol-based accounts of cognition and emphasizes the importance of environmental constraints and fundamental principles of learning as accounts of cognitive processing. The nature and possible contribution of stimulus equivalence to cognitive science are outlined, and connectionist simulations of complex equivalence phenomena are described. These simulations provide a possible rapprochement between behavior analysis and cognitive science.

Behavior-Analytic Approaches to Self-Awareness

The current paper provides an overview of behavior-analytic approaches to self-awareness. Skinner (1974) argued that the phenomenon of self-awareness is produced, in large part, by those social contingencies that reinforce discrimination of the organism’s own behavior. This view of self-awareness is supported by a range of empirical studies that successfully established self-discrimination performances in both nonhuman and human subjects. Recent developments in basic, applied, and conceptual analyses are currently extending Skinner’s behavior-analytic definition of self-awareness. The current paper focuses on a relational frame interpretation of human self-discrimination.

A Precursor to the Relational Evaluation Procedure: Analyzing Stimulus Equivalence

Four experiments are described that employed a form of go/no go procedure that we refer to as a precursor to the Relational Evaluation Procedure (pREP). The pREP was used to train and test for equivalence responding, and the results of this procedure were compared with the results achieved using a standard matching-to-sample procedure. Each trial in the pREP involved a sample stimulus and either a positive or negative comparison stimulus being presented successively on a computer screen, followed by a 5-sec response interval. Subjects were required to press the space bar of a computer keyboard on sample-positive comparison trials and to not press the space bar on sample-negative comparison trials. Using either the pREP or a matching-to-sample procedure 20 subjects were trained in the following four tasks, A1 → B1, A2 → B2, B1 → C1, B2 → C2. They were then tested for four symmetrical relations (B1 → A1, B2 → A2, C1 → B1, C2 → B2), and two equivalence relations (C1 → A1 and C2 → A2), using both the pREP and matching-to-sample procedures, with the order of presentation of the two types of test varied across experiments. The results of the four experiments reported here demonstrate that the pREP is less effective than the matching-to-sample procedure in generating equivalence responding. However, performance on the pREP tests improved when the subjects had prior exposure to matching-to-sample training and/or testing. This finding suggests that further study of the interactions between these two procedures, combined with suggested refinements to the pREP itself, may contribute to a fuller understanding of those variables most relevant to producing equivalence responding.

Stimulus Equivalence and Academic Self-Concept Among Mildly Mentally Handicapped and Nonhandicapped Children

Twelve mildly mentally handicapped and twelve nonhandicapped children were exposed to two separate stimulus equivalence procedures, one employing neutral, arbitrary stimuli (abstract shapes) and the other employing loaded stimuli (words). The neutral equivalence procedure served as a control measure, and passing the neutral test was a prerequisite for a subject’s inclusion in the study. The loaded equivalence procedure incorporated words pertinent to academic self-concept (“Slow” and “Able”) as B stimuli, and personal names (subject’s own name and a fictional name) as C stimuli. Experimentally induced equivalence relations linked the subjects’ own names to the word Able. A statistically significant difference in performance between mildly mentally handicapped and nonhandicapped subjects was obtained, with mildly mentally handicapped subjects producing significantly lower levels of equivalence responding on this test (i.e., failing to match their own name to the word Able). The results suggest that preexperimentally established relations between the handicapped subjects’ own names and the descriptive term Slow may have disrupted the formation of experimentally induced equivalence relations for some of the handicapped subjects.

A Behavior-Analytic Approach to Behavioral Reflexivity

The purpose of this paper is to examine the issue of behavioral reflexivity from a behavior-analytic perspective. Two quotations from behavioral researchers are first considered, and both suggest that behavioral reflexivity is an issue best ignored. The nature of behavioral reflexivity is then examined, in detail, by dividing it into three basic assumptions. This examination suggests that behavioral reflexivity precludes the possibility of finding an ontological (correspondence-based) truth in behavior analysis, and therefore the ontological truth of behavioral reflexivity itself is undermined. If a pragmatic truth criterion is adopted, however, the truth of behavioral reflexivity must be defined in terms of its usefulness in achieving particular goals, and thus the ontological truth of behavioral reflexivity becomes irrelevant. As a starting point for demonstrating the usefulness of behavioral reflexivity, an interpretive behavior analysis of behavioral reflexivity is conducted. This analysis suggests that behavioral reflexivity is produced, in large part, by the contingencies operating in the verbal community that establish responding to one’s own behavior, and to “truth,” in accordance with the relational frames of HERE and THERE, and NOW and THEN. The analysis is then used as the basis for an exercise for teaching students about behavioral reflexivity. Insofar as this exercise is useful in achieving particular goals, behavioral reflexivity is a true and welcome feature of behavior analysis.It would be absurd for the behaviorist to contend that he is in any way exempt from his analysis. He cannot step outside of the causal stream and observe behavior from some special point of vantage, ’perched on the epicycle of Mercury.’ In the very act of analyzing human behavior he is behaving. (Skinner, 1974, p. 234)