dc.contributor.author | Carpentier, Franck | |
dc.contributor.author | Smeets, Paul M. | |
dc.contributor.author | Barnes-Holmes, Dermot | |
dc.contributor.author | Stewart, Ian | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-08-24T08:24:19Z | |
dc.date.available | 2018-08-24T08:24:19Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2004-04-01 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Carpentier, Franck; Smeets, Paul M. Barnes-Holmes, Dermot; Stewart, Ian (2004). Matching derived functionally-same stimulus relations: equivalence-equivalence and classical analogies. The Psychological Record 54 (2), 255-273 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0033-2933,2163-3452 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10379/8942 | |
dc.description.abstract | Previous studies have shown that, after being trained on A-B and A-C matching tasks, subjects match not only functionally-same B and C stimuli (stimulus equivalence), but also BC compounds with same-class elements and BC compounds with different-class elements (equivalence-equivalence). Similar performances are required in classical analogies (a : b :: c : d). Therefore, some researchers have argued that equivalence-equivalence can serve as a behavior analytic model for analogical reasoning. Recent studies, however, have shown that compounds with same-class elements and different-class elements have different discriminative (S+, S-) properties. Hence, matching of same discriminative functions may have occurred. The present study aimed to design an equivalence-equivalence test in which the designated correct performances cannot be attributed to a process other than matching functionally-same relations. In Experiment 1, subjects were trained to relate X and Y stimuli to colors and X and Z stimuli to forms. After equivalence was assessed (Y-X-Z), the subjects received an equivalence-equivalence test in which only compounds with same-class elements were used: an XY or XZ compound as sample and an XY and XZ compound as comparisons (e.g., X1Y1-X2Y2/X2Z2). All subjects passed the equivalence-equivalence test. However, as reported by 1 subject, and was later demonstrated in Experiment 2, these equivalence-equivalence tasks could be solved by matching functionally-same stimuli (e.g., Y1 -color-Y2, hence Y1-Y2). Experiment 3 demonstrated that this problem also exists in classical analogy tasks. When given the analogy tasks used by Goswami and Brown (1990), all subjects selected the correct d-term option on the basis of the b-term alone (equivalence). In Experiment 4, the equivalence-equivalence test was further modified to permit differentiation of matching functionally-same relations from matching functionally-same stimuli. All 5 subjects readily matched functionally-same equivalence relations, thus evidenced equivalence-equivalence or analogical reasoning. | |
dc.publisher | Springer Nature | |
dc.relation.ispartof | The Psychological Record | |
dc.rights | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Ireland | |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ie/ | |
dc.subject | conditional discrimination | |
dc.subject | verbal analogies | |
dc.subject | children | |
dc.subject | model | |
dc.subject | expansion | |
dc.title | Matching derived functionally-same stimulus relations: equivalence-equivalence and classical analogies | |
dc.type | Article | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/bf03395473 | |
dc.local.publishedsource | http://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1234&context=tpr | |
nui.item.downloads | 0 | |