INCONGRUOUS STIMULUS PAIRING AND CONDITIONAL DISCRIMINATION TRAINING: EFFECTS ON RELATIONAL RESPONDING
- 1 September 1997
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
- Vol. 68 (2) , 143-160
- https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1997.68-143
Abstract
In Experiment 1, 5 subjects were exposed to a stimulus-pairing procedure in which two nonsense syllables, identified by a letter-number code as A1 and C2, each predicted the onset of a sexual film clip, and the nonsense syllables A2 and C1 each predicted the onset of a nonsexual film clip. Subjects were then exposed to a matching-to-sample test in which the nonsense syllables A1 and A2 were presented as sample stimuli and C1 and C2 were presented as comparison stimuli and vice versa (i.e., C stimuli as samples and A stimuli as comparisons). All subjects matched A1 with C2 and A2 with C1. Subjects were then trained on the conditional discriminations A1-B1, A2-B2, B1-C1, B2-C2, after which the matching-to-sample test was again administered. All subjects continued to match A1 with C2 and A2 with C1 in accordance with the earlier stimulus-pairing contingencies. An additional 5 subjects were exposed first to conditional discrimination training and testing before being exposed to the incongruous stimulus pairing and matching-to-sample testing. Under these conditions, 4 of the 5 subjects always matched A1 with C1 and A2 with C2. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1, except that a matching-to-sample test was not administered following the initial training procedure. Under these conditions, matching-to-sample test performances were controlled by the contingencies that had immediately preceded the test. Experiment 3 indicated that initial matching-to-sample test performances were unlikely to change, even after repeated exposure to incongruous training and testing. Experiment 4 demonstrated that pretraining with unrelated stimulus sets increased the sensitivity of matching-to-sample test performances to incongruous contingencies when they were similar in format to those arranged during pretraining. These data may have implications for a behavior-analytic interpretation of attitude formation and change.Keywords
This publication has 31 references indexed in Scilit:
- Relational Frame Theory and Stimulus Equivalence are Fundamentally Different: A Reply to Saunders’ CommentaryThe Psychological Record, 1996
- Stimulus Equivalence and Academic Self-Concept Among Mildly Mentally Handicapped and Nonhandicapped ChildrenThe Psychological Record, 1996
- 9 New Procedures for establishing emergent matching performances in children and adults: Implications for stimulus equivalencePublished by Elsevier ,1996
- NAMING AS A TECHNICAL TERM: SACRIFICING BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS AT THE ALTAR OF POPULARITY?Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1996
- A Transfer of Functions and a Conditional Transfer of Functions Through Equivalence Relations in Three-To Six-Year-Old ChildrenThe Psychological Record, 1995
- A Transfer of Explicitly and Nonexplicitly Trained Sequence Responses Through Equivalence Relations: An Experimental Demonstration and Connectionist ModelThe Psychological Record, 1994
- A TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS THROUGH DERIVED ARBITRARY AND NONARBITRARY STIMULUS RELATIONSJournal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1993
- Radical Behaviorism, Stimulus Equivalence, and Human CognitionThe Psychological Record, 1991
- Equivalence class formation in non-hearing impaired children and hearing impaired childrenThe Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 1990
- CONTEXTUAL CONTROL OF EMERGENT EQUIVALENCE RELATIONSJournal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1989