Measuring differential nodal distance using the function acquisition speed test

How to Build and How not to Build an Implicit Measure in Behavior Analysis: A case Study Using the Function Acquisition Speed Test

This article provides a comprehensive overview of the development of a behavior-analytic alternative to the popular implicit association test (IAT), namely, the function acquisition speed test (FAST). The IAT appears, prima facia, to indirectly assess participants' learning histories with regard to the categorization of stimuli. However, its origin within cognitive psychology has rendered it replete with mentalism, conceptual ambiguity, statistical arbitrariness, and confounding procedural artifacts. The most popular behavioral alternative to the IAT, the widely used implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP), has inherited many of these concerning artifacts. In this article, we present a behavior-analytic critique of both the IAT and IRAP, and argue that a behavior-analytic approach to implicit measures must have stimulus control front and center in its analysis. We then outline a series of early research studies that provided the basis for a potentially superior procedure within our field. We go on to outline how this early research was harnessed in stepwise research, guided by a strict adherence to traditional behavior-analytic methods for the analysis of stimulus relations, to increasingly modify a test format fit for the behavior analyst interested in assessing stimulus relatedness.

Augmenting salivation, but not evaluations, through subliminal conditioning of eating-related words

Correlating eating-related words (CS) with positively valenced words (US+) may augment eating-associated motivational responses (e.g., preingestive salivation) with minimal CS knowledge. We tested this claim using a subliminal conditioning procedure, where CS and US were presented under subliminal and supraliminal visual conditions. Three groups of Brazilian undergraduates (N = 69) viewed eating-related words (CS) or their scrambled counterparts (non-CS) followed by positive (US+) or neutral (US-) words. A free-selection visibility check confirmed that subliminally presented CS and non-CS had not been detected by any group. Participants exposed to CS/US+ pairings produced significantly more saliva relative to participants exposed to CS/US- and non-CS/US+ pairings. Reliable induction of salivation, coupled with null outcomes across evaluation measures, suggests that affective information related to eating can subliminally augment preingestive salivation with minimal deliberation.