Matching-to-Sample and Stimulus-Pairing-Observation Procedures in Stimulus Equivalence: The Effects of Number of Trials and Stimulus Arrangement

Matching-to-Sample and Stimulus-Pairing-Observation Procedures in Stimulus Equivalence: The... Studies comparing the effectiveness of the stimulus-pairing-observation and matching-to-sample procedures in facilitating equivalence relations have reported conflicting findings. This study compared the effectiveness of these procedures and examined the effect of stimulus arrangement and the number of training trials completed prior to each exposure to tests for symmetry and equivalence. Overall, the matching-to-sample procedure resulted in a greater percentage of participants demonstrating equivalence, and with fewer training trials, than did the stimulus-pairing-observation procedure. The one-to-many stimulus arrangement was more effective than the many-to-one and linear arrangements, overall. However, there was an interaction between the type of training procedure and stimulus arrangement. Participants who completed 120 training trials prior to each test were more likely to demonstrate equivalence than participants who completed 60 trials. This appeared to be the result of completing a greater number of trials prior to each test rather than of the number of training trials completed overall. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The Psychological Record Springer Journals

Matching-to-Sample and Stimulus-Pairing-Observation Procedures in Stimulus Equivalence: The Effects of Number of Trials and Stimulus Arrangement

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/matching-to-sample-and-stimulus-pairing-observation-procedures-in-0IgdJ3GCX8
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 by Association of Behavior Analysis International
Subject
Psychology; Psychology, general
ISSN
0033-2933
eISSN
2163-3452
D.O.I.
10.11133/j.tpr.2013.63.1.012
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Studies comparing the effectiveness of the stimulus-pairing-observation and matching-to-sample procedures in facilitating equivalence relations have reported conflicting findings. This study compared the effectiveness of these procedures and examined the effect of stimulus arrangement and the number of training trials completed prior to each exposure to tests for symmetry and equivalence. Overall, the matching-to-sample procedure resulted in a greater percentage of participants demonstrating equivalence, and with fewer training trials, than did the stimulus-pairing-observation procedure. The one-to-many stimulus arrangement was more effective than the many-to-one and linear arrangements, overall. However, there was an interaction between the type of training procedure and stimulus arrangement. Participants who completed 120 training trials prior to each test were more likely to demonstrate equivalence than participants who completed 60 trials. This appeared to be the result of completing a greater number of trials prior to each test rather than of the number of training trials completed overall.

Journal

The Psychological RecordSpringer Journals

Published: May 23, 2017

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off