Stimulus Relations in Comparative Primate Perspective

Translational behavior analysis: from laboratory science in stimulus control to intervention with persons with neurodevelopmental disabilities

Throughout its history, laboratory research in the experimental analysis of behavior has been successful in elucidating and clarifying basic learning principles and processes in both humans and nonhumans. In parallel, applied behavior analysis has shown how fundamental behavior-analytic principles and procedures can be employed to promote desirable forms of behavior and to prevent or ameliorate undesirable forms in clinical, educational, and other settings. Less obviously, there has also emerged a small but identifiable bridging field that can potentially connect and inform both basic and applied behavior analysis. Although such translational behavior analysis uses laboratory methodologies, research targets are selected largely for their value in ultimate application to improve the human condition. I will discuss the distinction of translational behavior analysis from basic and applied behavior analysis and consider the potential contribution that translational research can make in the development of the science of behavior.

Inferential reasoning by exclusion in pigeons, dogs, and humans

The ability to reason by exclusion (which is defined as the selection of the correct alternative by logically excluding other potential alternatives; Call in Anim Cogn 9:393-403 2006) is well established in humans. Several studies have found it to be present in some nonhuman species as well, whereas it seems to be somewhat limited or even absent in others. As inconsistent methodology might have contributed to the revealed inter-species differences, we examined reasoning by exclusion in pigeons (n = 6), dogs (n = 6), students (n = 6), and children (n = 8) under almost equal experimental conditions. After being trained in a computer-controlled two-choice procedure to discriminate between four positive (S+) and four negative (S-) photographs, the subjects were tested with displays consisting of one S- and one of four novel stimuli (S'). One pigeon, half of the dogs and almost all humans preferred S' over S-, thereby choosing either by novelty, or by avoiding S- without acquiring any knowledge about S', or by inferring positive class membership of S' by excluding S-. To decide among these strategies the subjects that showed a preference for S' were then tested with displays consisting of one of the S' and one of four novel stimuli (S''). Although the pigeon preferentially chose the S'' and by novelty, dogs and humans maintained their preference for S', thereby showing evidence of reasoning by exclusion. Taken together, the results of the present study suggest that none of the pigeons, but half of the dogs and almost all humans inferred positive class membership of S' by logically excluding S-.

On aims and methods in the neuroimaging of derived relations

Ingenious and seemingly powerful technologies have been developed recently that enable the visualization in some detail of events in the brain concomitant upon the ongoing behavioral performance of a human participant. Measurement of such brain events offers at the very least a new set of dependent variables in relation to which the independent variables familiarly manipulated in the operant laboratory may be explored. Two related paradigms in which a start has been made in such research concern the derivation of novel or emergent relations from a baseline set of trained relations, and include the phenomenon of transitive inference (TI), observed in studies of stimulus equivalence (SE) and serial learning (SL) or seriation. This paper reviews some published and forthcoming neuroimaging studies of these and related phenomena, and considers how this line of research both demands and represents a welcome synthesis between types of question and levels of explanation in behavioral science that often have been seen as antithetical.

Sea lions and equivalence: expanding classes by exclusion

Experiments have shown that human and nonhuman subjects are capable of performing new arbitrary stimulus-stimulus relations without error. When subjects that are experienced with matching-to-sample procedures are presented with a novel sample, a novel comparison, and a familiar comparison, most respond by correctly selecting the novel comparison in the presence of the new sample. This exclusion paradigm was expanded with two California sea lions that had previously formed two 10-member equivalence classes in a matching-to-sample procedure. Rather than being presented with a novel sample on a given trial, the sea lions were presented with a randomly selected familiar member of one class as the sample. One of the comparisons was a randomly selected familiar member of the alternative class, and the other was a novel stimulus. When required to choose which comparison matched the sample, the subjects reliably rejected the familiar comparison, and instead selected the unfamiliar one. Next, the sea lions were presented with transfer problems that could not be solved by exclusion; they immediately grouped the new stimuli into the appropriate classes. These findings show that exclusion procedures can rapidly generate new stimulus relations that can be used to expand stimulus classes.

Chimpanzee responding during matching to sample: control by exclusion

Three chimpanzees performed a computerized matching-to-sample task in which samples were photographs of items and comparison stimuli were geometric symbols called lexigrams. In Experiment 1, samples were either defined (i.e., they represented items that were associated already with a specific lexigram label by the chimpanzees) or undefined (i.e., they did not have an already learned association with a specific lexigram). On each trial, the foil (incorrect) comparison could be either a defined or an undefined lexigram. All 3 chimpanzees selected the correct comparison for undefined samples at a level significantly better than chance only when the foil comparison was defined. In Experiment 2, three comparisons were presented on each trial, and in Experiment 3, four comparisons were presented on each trial. For Experiments 2 and 3, the foil comparisons consisted of either defined or undefined comparisons or a mixture of both. For these two experiments, when the chimpanzees were presented with an undefined sample, they typically made selections of only undefined comparisons. These data indicate that the chimpanzees responded through use of exclusion. A final experiment, however, indicated that, despite the use of exclusion to complete trials with undefined samples correctly, the chimpanzees did not learn new associations between undefined samples and comparisons.

Concept formation based on the relations among values of multi-component figures

A complex discrimination procedure was used to test class formation with multi-component figures in college students. First, selections of a red-+45 degrees -oriented rectangle (A1B1) instead of a red -45 degrees -oriented rectangle (A1B2) and of a green -45 degrees -oriented rectangle (A2B2) instead of a green-+45 degrees -oriented rectangle (A2B1), were reinforced. Second, selections of a +45 degrees -obtuse-angle-white hexagon (B1C1), instead of a +45 degrees -two-acute-angle hexagon (B1C2) and of a -45 degrees -two-acute-angle hexagon (B2C2), instead of a -45 degrees -obtuse-angle hexagon (B2C1), were reinforced. Subsequent tests with figures A1B1 and A2B1, A2B2 and A1B2, B1C1 and B2C1, and B2C2 and B1C2 demonstrated selection of the same figures as in training. Other tests with a novel figure compounded by color A1 and form C1 and a novel figure compounded by color A1 and form C2, or a novel figure compounded by A2 and C1 and a novel figure compounded by A2 and C2 demonstrated consistent selection of figures A1C1 and A2C2. A final test with figures A1C1 and A2C1, or with figures A2C2 and A1C2 also showed consistent selections of the same figures -A1C1 and A2C2. The resulting classification among selected and non-selected figures cannot be based on particular properties of the selected figures, or in a combination of a particular set of those properties, because both selected and non-selected figures were compounded by identical values. Instead, the participants selected the figures with two values of the same set (A1,B1, or C1, or A2,B2 or C2). Thus, these results demonstrated categorization based on the relations among the values of the figures. Therefore, these results have important implications for the study of concept formation.

Testing for symmetry in the conditional discriminations of language-trained chimpanzees

If subjects are taught to match Stimulus A to B and then, without further training, match B to A, they have passed a test of symmetry. It has been suggested that non-humans' lack of success on symmetry tests might be overcome by giving them a history of symmetry exemplar training, that is, by directly teaching a large number of conditional relations (e.g., AB, CD, EF,...) and also directly training the "reverse" of these relations (e.g., BA, DC, FE,...). The chimpanzee subjects of the present study, Sherman, Austin, and Lana, had already received extensive symmetry exemplar training as a result of attempts to teach a selection-based language system of lexigrams. The present study systematically subjected 2 of these chimps (Sherman and Lana), for the first time, to standard symmetry tests in controlled conditions. Both chimps failed the tests, even when their correct responses on test trials were reinforced. The findings do not support the exemplar training hypothesis, and cast doubt upon whether the chimps can pass tests of stimulus equivalence.