Two Discriminative Functions of Meaningful Stimuli That Enhance Equivalence Class Formation.
Two experiments explored how order of training, familiar pictures, and abstract stimuli that acquired discriminative functions influenced equivalence class formation. In Experiment 1, three 3-node, 5-member equivalence classes (A → B → C → D → E) were established using a variation of the simultaneou...
| Publicado en: | Psychological Record Vol. 64; no. 4; pp. 777 - 790 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Dec2014
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=99077035&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 99077035 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00332933 PSD jtl: Psychological Record issn: 00332933 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Dec2014 vid: 64 iid: 4 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 99077035 10.1007/s40732-014-0072-5 ppf: 777 ppct: 13 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 1.1MB tig: atl: Two Discriminative Functions of Meaningful Stimuli That Enhance Equivalence Class Formation. aug: au: Nartey, Richard Arntzen, Erik Fields, Lanny affil: Department of Behavioral Science, Oslo and Akershus University College, St. Olavs Plass 0130 Oslo Norway Queens College and The Graduate School of the City University of New York, New York USA su: Stimulus & response (Psychology) Equivalence classes (Set theory) Matching-to-sample discrimination (Psychology) Equivalence relations (Set theory) Differentiation (Cognition) sug: subj: Stimulus & response (Psychology) Equivalence classes (Set theory) Matching-to-sample discrimination (Psychology) Equivalence relations (Set theory) Differentiation (Cognition) keyword: Concurrent Discriminative functions Meaningfulness Order of training Serialized Simultaneous protocol Sorting test Concurrent Discriminative functions Meaningfulness Order of training Serialized Simultaneous protocol Sorting test ab: Two experiments explored how order of training, familiar pictures, and abstract stimuli that acquired discriminative functions influenced equivalence class formation. In Experiment 1, three 3-node, 5-member equivalence classes (A → B → C → D → E) were established using a variation of the simultaneous protocol that involved the serialized training of the AB, BC, CD, and DE baseline relations in that order, after which the emergence of all derived relations was tested on a concurrent basis. Classes were formed by 70 % of participants when the A-stimuli were familiar pictures and were members of the first-trained AB relations, while the B-E stimuli were abstract shapes. Classes were formed by 40 % of participants when the E-stimuli were familiar pictures and were members of the last-trained DE relations, while the A-D stimuli were abstract shapes. In two matching conditions, abstract stimuli that had acquired discriminative functions (Ss) prior to class formation were substituted for the A and E stimuli, and classes were formed by 20 % of participants in each condition. Further, greater enhancement effects were obtained using pictures than abstract stimuli that have acquired discriminative functions when these stimuli were the A members of the classes, while very little differences in yield were observed when they were the E members of the classes. Thus, likelihood of class formation could have been influenced by the position of a meaningful stimulus or an S in the structure of a class (i.e., A or E) and/or their order of introduction during training (first or last). For more than 92 % of the participants (37 of 40), a final sorting task produced the same outcomes as the derived relations tests. Experiment 2 isolated the effects of these variables by the concurrent establishment of the baselines with the A stimuli as pictures or as Ss. No participants formed classes in either condition. Thus, class enhancement by a meaningful stimulus depended on its inclusion in the first trained baseline relation and not its placement in the class structure. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|