Probability of Equivalence Formation: Familiar Stimuli and Training Sequence

108 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

On the role of trial types in tests for stimulus equivalence (2009, background): “Others have in addition reported a distinct pattern of response latencies involving an increase in reaction time on symmetry trials compared to baseline trials, and a further increase in response latency between symmetry and transitivity or global equivalence trials (Arntzen, 2004; Arntzen et al., i”
The Effects of Different Training Structures in the Establishment of Conditional Discriminations and Subsequent Performance on Tests for Stimulus Equivalence (2010, unknown): “references ARNTzEN, E. (2004). Probability of equivalence formation: Familiar stimuli and training sequence. The Psychological Record, 54, 275–291. ARNTzEN, E. (2007, March). Some procedural variables that might influence equivalence class formation. Paper presented at the annual convention of the T”
Training and Testing Parameters in Formation of Stimulus Equivalence: Methodological Issues (2012, background): “Furthermore, to have the pictures as A stimuli is more effective than presenting them later in training as C stimuli (Arntzen, 2004).”