lnu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Strengths and weaknesses of a single comparison, alternate response (SCAR) procedure for establishing ini- and multi-nodal stimulus eqivalence classes.
Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health, Social Work and Behavioural Sciences, School of Education, Psychology and Sport Science.
University of Liverpool (UK).
2011 (English)In: European Journal of Behavior Analysis, ISSN 1502-1149, Vol. 12, no 1, 135-156 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Factors determining the yield of establishing stimulus equivalence (SE) classes by means of a single-comparison, alternate-response (SCAR) procedure were explored in a series of experiments. Training involved Pavlovian study phases alternating with response phases until a criterion of performance was attained: there was no trial-by-trial feedback. Factors studied included the explicitness of instructions, types of stimuli used, number of classes to be established, number of nodes, types of tests, exemplar training, and response to an opportunity to relearn. Instructions did not need to be so explicit with 12 or fewer classes as they had been in an earlier study with 48 classes; stimulus type was not critical; but the procedure gave low yields with 3-nodal compared with 1-nodal classes, even with only 3 such classes. Added exemplar training helped to increase yield, but this was still poorer than in an otherwise similar study in which a matching-to-sample (MTS) procedure was substituted for the alternate response requirement. A key distinction may lie in the ambiguity of the alternate response requirement in contrast with the implicit rule in MTS that one of the stimuli present in the comparison array must be correct.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2011. Vol. 12, no 1, 135-156 p.
Keyword [en]
single-comparison alternate response procedure, matching-to-sample, stimulus equivalence, nodal number, respondent-type training procedure
National Category
Social Sciences
Research subject
Social Sciences, Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-15150OAI: oai:DiVA.org:lnu-15150DiVA: diva2:451941
Available from: 2011-11-02 Created: 2011-10-27 Last updated: 2016-05-03Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Ozolins, Andrejs
By organisation
School of Education, Psychology and Sport Science
In the same journal
European Journal of Behavior Analysis
Social Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Total: 101 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf