Relational responding and conditional discrimination procedures: an apparent inconsistency and clarification.

Ian Stewart, John McElwee
Author Information
  1. Ian Stewart: National University of Ireland Galway.

Abstract

This article discusses theoretical issues relating to an apparent terminological inconsistency between two recent studies involving relational responding. These studies employed a functionally similar protocol to establish contextual cues for arbitrarily applicable relational responding by using a nonarbitrary relational responding procedure; however, one employed the term nonarbitrary regarding this procedure, and the other used arbitrary. Both can be legitimately described as correct, but they use apparently contradictory descriptions because they focus on different aspects of the protocol; in one, the label is based on traditional conditional discrimination task nomenclature, whereas in the other, it is based on the type of relational responding being performed. The current article describes and then explains the issue. In doing so, it touches on an important topic concerning the relation between relational responding and the conditional discrimination procedure.

References

  1. Behav Modif. 2008 Mar;32(2):228-47 [PMID: 18285508]
  2. J Exp Anal Behav. 2007 Sep;88(2):179-97 [PMID: 17970414]
  3. J Exp Anal Behav. 1961 Jul;4:281-4 [PMID: 13718829]
  4. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Jan;37(1):5-22 [PMID: 7057129]
  5. J Exp Anal Behav. 2004 Sep;82(2):177-95 [PMID: 15540504]
  6. J Appl Behav Anal. 2007 Spring;40(1):45-71 [PMID: 17471793]
  7. J Speech Hear Res. 1971 Mar;14(1):5-13 [PMID: 5550631]
  8. J Exp Anal Behav. 2000 Mar;73(2):177-93 [PMID: 10784008]
  9. J Exp Anal Behav. 2009 Jan;91(1):105-26 [PMID: 19230515]
  10. Behav Anal. 2003 Fall;26(2):195-213 [PMID: 22478402]
  11. Adv Child Dev Behav. 2001;28:101-38 [PMID: 11605362]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0respondingrelationalprocedureconditionaldiscriminationarticleapparentinconsistencystudiesemployedprotocolnonarbitraryonebaseddiscussestheoreticalissuesrelatingterminologicaltworecentinvolvingfunctionallysimilarestablishcontextualcuesarbitrarilyapplicableusinghowevertermregardingusedarbitrarycanlegitimatelydescribedcorrectuseapparentlycontradictorydescriptionsfocusdifferentaspectslabeltraditionaltasknomenclaturewhereastypeperformedcurrentdescribesexplainsissuetouchesimportanttopicconcerningrelationRelationalprocedures:clarification

Similar Articles

Cited By (7)