Go/no-go procedure with compound stimuli and the emergence of two equivalence classes with three stimuli

Abstract

In a prevous study it was evaluated whether the go/no-go procedure with compound stimuli can generate emergent conditional relations. Responses emitted in the presence of «correct» compounds (A1B1, A2B2, A3B3, B1C1, B2C2 and B3C3) were followed by points. Responses emitted in the presence of «incorrect» compounds (A1B2, A1B3, A2B1, A2B3, A3B1, A3B2, B1C2, B1C3, B2C1, B2C3, B3C1 and B3C2) were not followed by programmed consequences. Each «correct» compound was presented twice in the same block of trials in order to balance the number of the «correct» and «incorrect» compound presented in each block. After training, the components of each compound were recombined in new compounds in order to allow symmetry (BA, CB), transitivity (AC) and equivalence (CA) relations to be tested. In these tests participants responded in the presence of the compounds formed by components of the same class. These performances were interpreted as evidence of emergent conditional relations. Since each «correct» compound was presented twice in a block, responses may have been under control of the compounds that were presented more frequently in the same block of trials. This performance could not be considered as the emergence of equivalence class. In order to verify whether the go/nogo procedure with compound stimuli would produce conditional emergent relations, in the present study an equal number of «correct» and «incorrect» compounds were presented in the same block of trials. Five undergraduate students were submitted to a computer task with the go/no-go procedure with compound stimuli formed by the combination of six individual stimuli (A1, B1, C1, A2, B2 and C2). During AB and BC relations training, responses in the presence of A1B1, B1C1, A2B2 and B2C2 compound stimuli were followed by points. Responses in the presence of A1B2, A2B1, B1C2 and B2C1 compound stimuli were not followed by programmed consequences. Symmetry (BA and CB), transitivity (AC) and equivalence (CA) relations were tested. Symmetry would be demonstrated if participants responded in the presence of B1A1, B2A2, C1B1 and C2B2, and did not responded in the presence of B1A2, B2A1, C1B2 and C2B1. Transitivity would be demonstrated if participants responded in the presence of A1C1 and A2C2, and did not responded in the presence of A1C2 and A2C1. Equivalence would be demonstrated if participants responded in the presence of C1A1 and C2A2, and did not responded in the presence of C2A1 and C1A2. All five participants showed symmetry and transitivity relations and four of them showed equivalence. The results indicate that it is possible to produce emergent conditional relations with a go/no-go procedure with compound stimuli. These results suggest that the go/no-go procedure with compound stimuli can generate emergent conditional relations and be an alternative for matching-to-sample (MTS) procedure in the study of the emergence of equivalence classes.