Search

The present study examined the effectiveness of the Relational Completion Procedure (RCP) in establishing arbitrarily applicable comparative relations after training with either linear (Experiment 1) or non-linear (Experiment 2) arbitrary relations. Linear relations were those presented in a sequential order (i.e., A--B, B--C, C--D, etc.), while nonlinear relations were presented in a nonsequential order (i.e., C--D, B--C, A--B, etc.). After nonarbitrary relational training and testing to establish the contextual functions of MORE THAN and LESS THAN, adults underwent constructed-response nonarbitrary relational training and testing with physically dissimilar stimuli in which they were required to 'complete' relational sentences in the presence of the cues. Next, during arbitrary relational training with abstract stimuli, participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 training groups: All-More (E > D, D > C, C > B, and B > A), All-Less (A < B, B < C, C < D, and D < E), and Less-More (A < B, B < C, D > C, and E > D). Finally, during arbitrary relational testing, probes for mutually entailed relations were followed by probes for 1- and 2-node combinatorially entailed relations. The yield, or percentage of participants passing, was 83% in Experiment 1 and 91.6% in Experiment 2. Our findings demonstrate that the RCP was successful in establishing arbitrarily applicable comparative relations with adults regardless of the order in which the arbitrary relational training trials were presented. Key words: arbitrarily applicable comparative relations, More Than, Less Than, Relational Completion Procedure, constructed response, linear, adults, An extensive empirical literature now attests to the fact that human participants may come to respond in accordance with multiple stimulus relations, such as Same and Opposite, Before and After, [...]

To establish a series of derived relations between arbitrary stimuli, 20 subjects were exposed to nonarbitrary and arbitrary relational training and testing procedures. Subjects were then exposed to an avoidance [...]

The present study addressed international publication trends in JABA authorship between 1970 and 1999. First, we analyzed authorship patterns to identify trends in the appearance of new first authors, unfamiliar authors, and frequent contributors. Second, articles were assigned to either a North American or an international category. The data show a decline in the number of articles by new authors and an increase in the publications of frequent contributors from North America. Trends are shown in comparison to those from the American Journal on Mental Retardation. DESCRIPTORS: Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, publication trends, geographical origin, authorship

Two subjects (Experiment 1) and one subject (Experiment 2) were given nonarbitrary relational pretraining that brought their responses under the control of four contextual stimuli; SAME, OPPOSITE, MORE-THAN, and LESS-THAN. Two further subjects in Experiment 1 were not exposed to this pretraining. All five subjects were then trained on the following six matching-to-sample tasks in the presence of three of the four contextual cues; SAME/A1-B1, OPPOSITE/A1-B3, SAME/A1-C1, OPPOSITE/A1-C3, MORE-THAN/A1-B2, MORE-THAN/A1-C2. Subject 5 in Experiment 2 was also trained on an additional two tasks. All five subjects were then tested for the following 10 derived arbitrarily applicable relations; SAME/B1-C1, OPPOSITE/B1-C3, SAME/B3-C3, OPPOSITE/B3-C1, MORE-THAN/B1-C2, MORE-THAN/C1-B2, LESS-THAN/B2-C1, LESS-THAN/C2-B1, LESS-THAN/B2-A1, LESS-THAN/C2-A1. All three pretrained subjects, but neither of the two nonpretrained subjects, passed these tests. Two of the stimuli from the relational network, B1 and B3, were then used to train two different self-discrimination responses using either detailed instructions (Subjects 1 to 4, Experiment 1) or minimal instructions (Subject 5, Experiment 2) on two complex schedules of reinforcement (i.e., subjects were trained to pick the B1 stimulus if they had not emitted a response, and to pick the B3 stimulus if they had emitted one or more responses on the previous schedule). All three pretrained subjects, and only one nonpretrained subject, showed the predicted transformation of self-discrimination response functions in accordance with the arbitrarily applicable relations of sameness and opposition (i.e., no response - pick C1, one or more responses - pick C3)., Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the burgeoning research area of stimulus equivalence is the transfer of functions effect. That is, a response trained to one member of an equivalence [...]