Arntzen Erik, Fields Lanny
Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.
Queens College and The Graduate School of the City University of New York, USA.
J Exp Anal Behav. 2025 Jul;124(1):e70017. doi: 10.1002/jeab.70017. Epub 2025 May 26.
The likelihood of forming equivalence classes was influenced by the format used in sorting tests and by four different test criteria applied to the same data set. After 30 participants learned 12 conditional discriminations, MTS tests evaluated the emergence of three 5-member equivalence classes. These tests were followed by sorting tests that were conducted in clustering or stacking formats. After training, 20% of participants formed the classes. Of the 75% who did not, classes emerged for 36% and 15% of participants during stacking and clustering, respectively, with a criterion of consecutive class-indicative sorts in the first two sorting tests, and by 45% and 15% of participants during stacking and clustering, respectively, with a criterion of two successive class-indicative sorts in any of the four sorting tests. Overall, a somewhat higher percentage of participants formed classes during stacking than during clustering, sometimes on a delayed basis. Finally, even higher yields were obtained when criterion was defined as two nonconsecutive class-indicative sorting tests. When classes did not form, clustering rather than stacking tests generated larger proportions of stereotyped, participant-defined, three-member classes and two-term relations but stacking generated more one-stimulus "groupings." Thus, class formation was influenced by sorting format and the criteria used to define class emergence. Also, sorting influenced performances even during failed class formation.
形成等价类的可能性受到排序测试中使用的格式以及应用于同一数据集的四种不同测试标准的影响。在30名参与者学习了12种条件辨别后,多重刺激辨别测试评估了三个由5个成员组成的等价类的出现情况。这些测试之后进行了以聚类或堆叠格式进行的排序测试。训练后,20%的参与者形成了这些类。在未形成类的75%的参与者中,在堆叠和聚类过程中,分别有36%和15%的参与者形成了类,其标准是在前两次排序测试中连续进行指示类别的排序;在堆叠和聚类过程中,分别有45%和15%的参与者形成了类,其标准是在四次排序测试中的任何一次中连续进行两次指示类别的排序。总体而言,在堆叠过程中形成类的参与者比例略高于聚类过程,有时会有延迟。最后,当标准定义为两次非连续的指示类别的排序测试时,得到了更高的成功率。当没有形成类时,聚类测试而非堆叠测试产生了更大比例的刻板的、参与者定义的、由三个成员组成的类和两项关系,但堆叠产生了更多的单一刺激“分组”。因此,类的形成受到排序格式和用于定义类出现的标准的影响。此外,即使在类形成失败的情况下,排序也会影响表现。