|
| Stimulus and Response Substitution in Interbehavioral Perspective |
| Sunday, May 24, 2009 |
| 3:00 PM–4:20 PM |
| North 132 A |
| Area: TPC/EAB; Domain: Theory |
| Chair: Linda J. Parrott Hayes (University of Nevada, Reno) |
| CE Instructor: Daniel J. Moran, Ph.D. |
| Abstract: The principles of stimulus and response substitution, as articulated by J. R. Kantor, are identified and exemplified in the context of investigations of perceptual behavior and remembering. It is argued that these principles are foundational for the science of behavior. |
| |
| Stimulus and Response Substitution |
| LINDA J. PARROTT HAYES (University of Nevada, Reno) |
| Abstract: Kantor distinguishes the functional properties of stimuli and responses from their object and organizational properties, respectively. These disctinctions permit more coherent descriptions of complex human interactions such as perceiving, imagining, dreaming, and remembering than have been proposed under the auspices of Radical Behaviorism. The value of these distinctions for the investigation of complex human behavior is addressed. |
| |
| Substitution of Perceptual Functions |
| MARIA ISABEL MUNOZ BLANCO (University of Nevada), Erick M. Dubuque (University of Nevada, Reno), Michael C. Clayton (Youngstown State University), Linda J. Parrott Hayes (University of Nevada, Reno) |
| Abstract: The present study examines the process of stimulus substitution directly. Previous research has demonstrated substitution, but only indirectly in the context of other processes. This study proposes that the relationship among homophone words may be transferred to other stimuli. In order to demonstrate this, 100 participants were exposed to a series of observational learning trials. By using a respondent-type training procedure, a letter was paired with a word. After this training the participants were exposed to a series of simple math problems in which they were required to replace the unknown symbol in the equation with a number from 1 to 9. The results were analyzed in terms of the concordance between the number substituted for the uknown and the corresponding homophone word that had previously been trained. |
| |
| An Investigation of Factors Influencing Remembering Interactions |
| MITCH FRYLING (University of Nevada, Reno), Linda J. Parrott Hayes (University of Nevada, Reno) |
| Abstract: Memory research in behavior science has almost exclusively focused on memorizing interactions. This paper builds upon the memory literature by investigating factors that influence remembering conceptualized as completing an act in the future. Experimental data evaluating factors that influence the development and operation of substitute stimuli within the context of an interbehavioral field perspective are reviewed. Implications for understanding complex remembering interactions are provided. |
| |
| An Interpretation of Operant Processes in Terms of Substitution of Functions |
| DIANA M. DELGADO (University of Nevada, Reno), Linda J. Parrott Hayes (University of Nevada, Reno) |
| Abstract: Traditionally, respondent and operant conditioning have been understood as different types of learning processes that account for different types of behaviors. While substitutive operations have been considered characteristic of S-S associations, reinforcement has been considered to be the main principle in operant conditioning. Current research on the study of complex human behavior using respondent procedures indicates that behaviors which have been categorized as operant may be acquired without the use of reinforcers. We challenge the operant-respondent dichotomy and propose that substitution of functions is the fundamental process that accounts for psychological events. In this context, reinforcement is best understood as a procedure and not as a distinct type of conditioning. |
|
| |