Training and testing for a transformation of fear and avoidance functions using the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure: The first study

The IRAP as a Measure of Implicit Cognition: A Case of Frankenstein’s Monster

The implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) was initially developed as a way to assess the strength and probability of natural verbal relations, as defined within relational frame theory (RFT), and was conceptually rooted within the behavior-analytic tradition. However, the IRAP quickly became employed primarily as a measure of implicit cognition, more in line with mainstream psychology than behavior analysis. In doing so, research using the IRAP increasingly employed ill-defined mainstream psychological terms, focused on correlational analyses with traditional psychometry, and thus emphasized prediction over the prediction-and-influence of behavior. Although perhaps beneficial to the study of implicit cognition, this approach could be argued to have limited the IRAP's utility in behavior analyses of human language and cognition. In the current article we will reflect on this suggestion, on the IRAPs place and current use in the field of behavior analysis, and on its potential future within behavioral psychology in light of recent conceptual and empirical advances in RFT. In doing so, it is hoped that the measure may be refined into a better understood, more precise, functional-analytic tool.

Transfer of conditioned fear and avoidance: Concurrent measurement of arousal and operant responding

A reversal design was employed for the analysis of transfer of fear and avoidance through equivalence classes. Two 5-member equivalence classes (A1-B1-C1-D1-E1 and A2-B2-C2-D2-E2) were established. Then B1 and C1 were paired with shock (CS+) and served as S^D s in avoidance training (B2 and C2 were trained as CS-/S^∆ s for avoidance). Further avoidance training followed with D1 and E1 (as S^D s) and D2 and E2 (as S^∆ s), with the first presentation of each of these stimuli serving as the first transfer test. Afterwards, aversive conditioning contingencies were reversed: B2 and D2 were paired with shock and trained as S^D s for avoidance, B1 and D1 were presented without shock (CS-/S^∆ s). Transfer was tested again with C1, E1, C2 and E2. This reversal was implemented to allow for the within-subject replication of transfer effects upon changes in the function of only a subset of each class's elements. Avoidance (key presses) and conditioned fear (skin conductance and heart rate) were simultaneously measured. Results show a clear transfer effect for avoidance, with between- and within-subject replications. For physiological measures, transfer effects in the first test could only be imputed on the basis of group-based inferential statistical analysis. Evidence for between-subject replication was weaker, with only a limited proportion of participants meeting the individual criterion for transfer.

Measurement of the Vertical Spatial Metaphor of Power Concepts Using the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure

This experimental study explored the use of the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) for understanding the vertical spatial metaphor of power. In the classic IRAP procedure, we formed four sets of stimuli based on the relationship between power words (powerful and powerless words) and vertical position on a computer screen (upper or lower) that were either pro-metaphor (i.e., powerful-high, powerless-low) or anti-metaphor (i.e., powerful-low, powerless-high). Participants were then asked to judge whether the words were consistent or inconsistent with the set of instructions given to them. We found that the D irap scores of powerful words in an above vertical space and powerless words in a below vertical space were higher than zero. Furthermore, the D irap scores of the pro-metaphor stimuli were significantly greater than were those of the anti-metaphor stimuli. Vertical spatial position metaphor of power concepts was verified again by IRAP. These findings suggest that there is an established spatial metaphor for power, which we explain using relational frame theory. It is the first study to our knowledge to explore this metaphor using the IRAP, which overcomes the limitations of paradigms such as the implicit association test, and provides a better understanding of the mechanism of the metaphor.