Abstract
AbstractThe current study compared two equivalence‐based instruction (EBI) protocols to each other and to a self‐study control group to teach classes of logical fallacies to college students. The two different EBI protocols were stimulus‐pairing yes–no (SPYN) responding and match‐to‐sample (MTS). Four three‐member logical fallacy classes were taught (i.e., ad hominem, circular argument, faulty analogy, and slippery slope). Class members consisted of the fallacy definition, fallacy name, and multiple examples of vignettes of each fallacy. Three vignette exemplars per class were used to program for generalization across vignettes, and two more were reserved to assess generalization. Written and computerized tests were completed before training, immediately following training, and at a 1‐week follow‐up session. The results showed that both MTS and SPYN EBI procedures were superior to self‐study procedures with respect to computerized test outcomes, but not written test outcomes. In addition, the effects of MTS and SPYN were similar to one another regarding equivalence class formation, computerized tests, and written tests. These results increase the range of procedures that may be used to establish equivalence classes.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
