ABSTRACT Equivalence classes are typically established using match to sample (MTS) procedures with single stimuli serving as samples and comparisons. In a recent study, however, equivalence classes were established with samples and comparisons consisting of compound stimuli (i.e., pairs of abstract symbols). One potential problem using compound stimuli during equivalence class formation, however, is that one element may overshadow the other, thereby disrupting class formation. To address this, the current study used two different compound configurations for incorrect (negative) comparisons during MTS. One group of participants was exposed to negative comparison compounds containing stimuli from only one class (referred to as Type 1 trials) while the other group was exposed to negative comparison compounds containing stimuli from both classes (Type 2 trials) along with Type 1 trials. Class formation was assessed with a test block containing single-element-to-single-element, single-element-to-compound, compound-to-single element, and compound-to-compound derived relations trials. A card sorting test with single elements was also conducted. Results showed that class formation was high and equally likely for both groups; therefore, overshadowing did not occur for either group. Thus, Type 2 trials may be unnecessary during class formation with compound stimuli, and their omission would likely increase efficiency of instruction.
Read full abstract