Literature DB >> 11029023

Derived relational responding as generalized operant behavior.

O Healy1, D Barnes-Holmes, P M Smeets.   

Abstract

The major aim of the present study was to demonstrate that derived relational responding may be viewed as a form of generalized operant behavior. In Experiment 1, 4 subjects were divided into two conditions (2 in each condition). Using a two-comparison matching-to-sample procedure, all subjects were trained and tested for the formation of two combinatorially entailed relations. Subjects were trained and tested across multiple stimulus sets. Each set was composed of novel stimuli. Both Conditions 1 and 2 involved explicit performance-contingent feedback presented at the end of each block of test trials (i.e., delayed feedback). In Condition 1, feedback was accurate (consistent with the experimenter-designated relations) following exposure to the initial stimulus sets. When subjects' responding reached a predefined mastery criterion, the feedback then switched to inaccurate (not consistent with the experimenter-designated relations) until responding once again reached a predefined criterion. Condition 2 was similar to Condition 1, except that exposure to the initial stimulus sets was followed by inaccurate feedback and once the criterion was reached feedback switched to accurate. Once relational responding emerged and stabilized, response patterns on novel stimulus sets were controlled by the feedback delivered for previous stimulus sets. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1, except that during Conditions 3 and 4 four comparison stimuli were employed during training and testing. Experiment 3 was similar to Condition 1 of Experiment 1, except that after the mastery criterion was reached for class-consistent responding, feedback alternated from accurate to inaccurate across each successive stimulus set. Experiment 4 involved two types of feedback, one type following tests for mutual entailment and the other type following tests for combinatorial entailment. Results from this experiment demonstrated that mutual and combinatorial entailment may be controlled independently by accurate and inaccurate feedback. Overall, the data support the suggestion, made by relational frame theory, that derived relational responding is a form of generalized operant behavior.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11029023      PMCID: PMC1284792          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2000.74-207

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav        ISSN: 0022-5002            Impact factor:   2.468


  22 in total

1.  Teaching relational discrimination to individuals with mental retardation: some problems and possible solutions.

Authors:  W J McIlvane; W V Dube; J B Kledaras; F M Iennaco; L T Stoddard
Journal:  Am J Ment Retard       Date:  1990-11

2.  Analyzing derived stimulus relations requires more than the concept of stimulus class.

Authors:  S Hayes; D Barnes
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Reversal of baseline relations and stimulus equivalence: I. Adults.

Authors:  C Pilgrim; M Galizio
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  A transformation of self-discrimination response functions in accordance with the arbitrarily applicable relations of sameness, more than, and less than.

Authors:  S Dymond; D Barnes
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Naming as a technical term: Sacrificing behavior analysis at the altar of popularity?

Authors:  D Barnes
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Incongruous stimulus pairing and conditional discrimination training: effects on relational responding.

Authors:  B Roche; D Barnes; P Smeets
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Conditional discrimination and equivalence relations: A theoretical analysis of control by negative stimuli.

Authors:  P F Carrigan; M Sidman
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Controlling relations in conditional discrimination and matching by exclusion.

Authors:  W J McIlvane; J B Kledaras; L C Munson; K A King; J C de Rose; L T Stoddard
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1987-09       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  Conditional discrimination vs. matching to sample: an expansion of the testing paradigm.

Authors:  M Sidman; W Tailby
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1982-01       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  Longitudinal study of the development of derived relations in an infant.

Authors:  R Lipkens; S C Hayes; L J Hayes
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  1993-10
View more
  18 in total

1.  Relational operants: processes and implications: a response to Palmer's review of Relational Frame Theory.

Authors:  Steven C Hayes; Dermot Barnes-Holmes
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Establishing naming in typically developing two-year-old children as a function of multiple exemplar speaker and listener experiences.

Authors:  Lina Gilic; R Douglas Greer
Journal:  Anal Verbal Behav       Date:  2011

3.  A rose by naming: how we may learn how to do it.

Authors:  R Douglas Greer; Jennifer Longano
Journal:  Anal Verbal Behav       Date:  2010

4.  Relational frames: where do they come from? A comment on Barnes-Holmes and Hayes (2003).

Authors:  Mark Galizio
Journal:  Behav Anal       Date:  2004

5.  Relational frame theory: A new paradigm for the analysis of social behavior.

Authors:  Bryan Roche; Yvonne Barnes-Holmes; Dermot Barnes-Holmes; Ian Stewart; Denis O'Hora
Journal:  Behav Anal       Date:  2002

6.  Creating a strategy for progress: a contextual behavioral science approach.

Authors:  Roger Vilardaga; Steven C Hayes; Michael E Levin; Takashi Muto
Journal:  Behav Anal       Date:  2009

7.  Evaluating the evidence base for relational frame theory: a citation analysis.

Authors:  Simon Dymond; Richard J May; Anita Munnelly; Alice E Hoon
Journal:  Behav Anal       Date:  2010

8.  Stimulus equivalence: testing Sidman's (2000) theory.

Authors:  Sara Tepaeru Minster; Max Jones; Douglas Elliffe; Suresh D Muthukumaraswamy
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  A derived transfer of simple discrimination and self-reported arousal functions in spider fearful and non-spider-fearful participants.

Authors:  Sinéad Smyth; Dermot Barnes-Holmes; John P Forsyth
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  Effects of multiple exemplar training on the emergence of derived relations in preschool children learning a second language.

Authors:  Rocio Rosales; Ruth Anne Rehfeldt; Sadie Lovett
Journal:  Anal Verbal Behav       Date:  2011
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.