Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Rule-governed behavior: teaching a preliminary repertoire of rule-following to children with autism.

The Analysis of verbal behavior·2012
Same author

The relation between stimulus function and equivalence class formation.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2004
See all related articles
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 14, 2026

A Naturalistic Setup for Presenting Real People and Live Actions in Experimental Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience Studies
07:43

A Naturalistic Setup for Presenting Real People and Live Actions in Experimental Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience Studies

Published on: August 4, 2023

Using action dynamics to assess competing stimulus control during stimulus equivalence testing.

Denis P O'Hora1, Ian T Tyndall, Mairéad McMorrow

  • 1School of Psychology, National University of Ireland Galway, University Road, Galway, Ireland. denis.ohora@nuigalway.ie

Learning & Behavior
|February 5, 2013
PubMed
Summary

This study examined how competing stimuli affect stimulus equivalence. Results show that phonological and orthographic distractors hinder equivalence responding, especially when prior training history creates stimulus competition.

More Related Videos

Corticospinal Excitability Modulation During Action Observation
12:33

Corticospinal Excitability Modulation During Action Observation

Published on: December 31, 2013

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons
07:13

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 14, 2026

A Naturalistic Setup for Presenting Real People and Live Actions in Experimental Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience Studies
07:43

A Naturalistic Setup for Presenting Real People and Live Actions in Experimental Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience Studies

Published on: August 4, 2023

Corticospinal Excitability Modulation During Action Observation
12:33

Corticospinal Excitability Modulation During Action Observation

Published on: December 31, 2013

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons
07:13

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

Area of Science:

  • Behavioral Psychology
  • Cognitive Science
  • Experimental Psychology

Background:

  • Stimulus equivalence research explores how arbitrary relations are learned.
  • Competing stimulus control can interfere with establishing these learned relations.
  • Understanding these interferences is crucial for refining equivalence testing protocols.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the impact of competing stimulus control on equivalence response dynamics.
  • To assess the influence of novel, orthographically, and phonologically similar distractors.
  • To compare the effects of different distractor types on equivalence responding.

Main Methods:

  • Conditional discrimination training was used to establish three 3-member equivalence classes.
  • Participants were tested using five trial types, including traditional, neutral, and similarity-based distractors.
  • Response trajectories were analyzed to understand the dynamics of competition.

Main Results:

  • Phonological and orthographic distractors significantly reduced equivalence responding compared to neutral distractors.
  • This effect was primarily observed in participants who did not demonstrate equivalence on traditional trials.
  • Prior reinforcement history with incorrect stimuli created greater competition than stimulus similarity.

Conclusions:

  • Competing stimulus control, particularly from prior reinforcement history, significantly impacts equivalence responding.
  • The type of distractor stimulus and individual differences in learning influence the degree of interference.
  • Findings suggest refining equivalence testing to account for potential sources of stimulus competition.