The Establishment of Visual Equivalence Classes with a Go/No-Go Successive Matching-to-Sample Procedure
- PDF / 615,440 Bytes
- 10 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 24 Downloads / 187 Views
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
The Establishment of Visual Equivalence Classes with a Go/No-Go Successive Matching-to-Sample Procedure Timothy G. Howland 1 & Karina N. Zhelezoglo 1 & Robbie J. Hanson 2 & Caio F. Miguel 1,2
&
Charisse A. Lantaya 1
Accepted: 6 September 2020 # Association for Behavior Analysis International 2020
Abstract The current study evaluated the effectiveness of a successive matching-to-sample (S-MTS) procedure with a go/no-go preparation to establish three 3-member classes of visual stimuli with 24 undergraduate college students. At the start of each trial, participants touched a sample stimulus after which a comparison immediately appeared in the same location on the screen. Then, depending on the relation between sample and comparison, participants were required to either touch the comparison (i.e., go) or to refrain from touching it (i.e., no-go). The comparison remained on the screen for 8 s independent of participants’ responses. Following training of baseline relations (AB/BC), responses to untrained relations (i.e., BA/CB and AC/CA) were assessed. Overall, 22 out of 24 participants met emergence criterion on AC/CA tests, with reaction times to comparisons below 5 s indicating that S-MTS may be a viable alternative to traditional MTS to establish equivalence classes. Keywords Derived stimulus relations . Discrimination . Equivalence . Go/No-Go . Matching-to-sample
Matching-to-sample (MTS) procedures are commonly used to teach conditional discriminations and test for emergent relations consistent with the properties of symmetry, transitivity, and equivalence (Green & Saunders, 1998; Sidman, 1994). In a typical MTS trial, a sample stimulus is presented with an array of comparisons. A response to a particular comparison is reinforced conditional upon its relation to the sample (Cumming & Berryman, 1961). Even though MTS has proven to be an effective teaching procedure (Green, 2001; McLay, Sutherland, Church, & Tyler-Merrick, 2013), it requires the learner to differentially respond to stimuli from one trial to the next (i.e., simple successive discriminations), as well as differentially respond to multiple stimuli presented at the same time (i.e., simple simultaneous discriminations; Green & Saunders, 1998). In the absence of these discriminative skills, responding to MTS may prove difficult, especially when teaching children with disabilities (Green, 2001; Grow, Carr, Kodak, Jostad, & Kisamore, 2011). The traditional MTS * Caio F. Miguel [email protected] 1
Department of Psychology, California State University, Sacramento, 6000 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95819-6007, USA
2
Institute for Applied Behavioral Science, Endicott College, 376 Hale Street, Beverly, MA 01915, USA
procedure has been shown to produce errors due to location bias (Da Hora, Debert, LaFrance, & Miguel, 2019), which can be remedied by strategies to promote stimulus control by sample and comparisons, such as requiring an observing response or presenting samples and comparisons an equal number of times (MacDonald & Langer, 2018). A
Data Loading...
