EMERGENT CONDITIONAL RELATIONS IN A GO/NO-GO PROCEDURE: FIGURE-GROUND AND STIMULUS-POSITION COMPOUND RELATIONS
Past research has demonstrated emergent conditional relations using a go/no‐go procedure with pairs of figures displayed side‐by‐side on a computer screen. The present study sought to extend applications of this procedure. In Experiment 1, we evaluated whether emergent conditional relations could be...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior 2009-09, Vol.92 (2), p.233-243 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 243 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 233 |
| container_title | Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior |
| container_volume | 92 |
| creator | Debert, Paula Huziwara, Edson M. Faggiani, Robson Brino De Mathis, Maria Eugênia Simões McIlvane, William J. |
| description | Past research has demonstrated emergent conditional relations using a go/no‐go procedure with pairs of figures displayed side‐by‐side on a computer screen. The present study sought to extend applications of this procedure. In Experiment 1, we evaluated whether emergent conditional relations could be demonstrated when two‐component stimuli were displayed in figure—ground relationships— figures displayed on backgrounds of different colors. Five normally capable adults participated. During training, each two‐component stimulus was presented successively. Responses emitted in the presence of some stimulus pairs (A1B1, A2B2, A3B3, B1C1, B2C2 and B3C3) were reinforced, whereas responses emitted in the presence of other pairs (A1B2, A1B3, A2B1, A2B3, A3B1, A3B2, B1C2, B1C3, B2C1, B2C3, B3C1 and B3C2) were not. During tests, new configurations (AC and CA) were presented, thus emulating structurally the matching‐to‐sample tests employed in typical equivalence studies. All participants showed emergent relations consistent with stimulus equivalence during testing. In Experiment 2, we systematically replicated the procedures with stimulus compounds consisting of four figures (A1, A2, C1 and C2) and two locations (left — B1 and right — B2). All 6 normally capable adults exhibited emergent stimulus—stimulus relations. Together, these experiments show that the go/no‐go procedure is a potentially useful alternative for studying emergent conditional relations when matching‐to‐sample is procedurally cumbersome or impossible to use. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1901/jeab.2009.92-233 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2732330</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ862936</ericid><sourcerecordid>1857365321</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5599-5bf174c5225efb7169c91ed71a01e383144aab68d92df394cfb32574f15d0e763</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFks-PlDAUxxujccfRuwdjiAc9MdsfQKkHE2RYZMPACEP22BQoysjACjPq_veWZSXuHvTQ9iXv-_3k9ZsHwEsEV4hBdL6XIl9hCNmKYR0T8ggsECO2TihCj8ECQox1U91n4Nkw7FXBLIqfgjMMiWlYEC1A6228xPeinebG0TrYBXHkhFrihc5YploQaY7mx-dRrPuxtk1i11tnifdeuwh89ep-EmfRWnPUSXfBJguzVN_G6S1IITfb2_bMew6eVKIZ5Iu7dwmyC2_nftLD2A9cJ9QL02RMN_MKUaMwMTZllVNksYIhWVIkIJLEJsgwhMgtu2S4rAgziion2KRGhcwSSmqRJfgwca9P-UGWhWyPvWj4dV8fRH_DO1Hz-522_sq_dD84pkTlCBXg1QSQfV3MPu_StjAjI__dHb_vvp_kcOSHeihk04hWdqeBU6KmZETRluDtP5UYYUghY0r45oFw3536VqWkNIaNLcpsJYKTqOi7YehlNY-GIB9Xgo8rwceV4Axz9RVlef13FLPhzw4ogTUJftaNvPkvkF96zkcyxrAE-mSsh6P8NRtF_41blFCTX0U-_8ywmxpXWxXJb9rGx3w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>214826798</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>EMERGENT CONDITIONAL RELATIONS IN A GO/NO-GO PROCEDURE: FIGURE-GROUND AND STIMULUS-POSITION COMPOUND RELATIONS</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ERIC - Full Text Only (Discovery)</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Debert, Paula ; Huziwara, Edson M. ; Faggiani, Robson Brino ; De Mathis, Maria Eugênia Simões ; McIlvane, William J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Debert, Paula ; Huziwara, Edson M. ; Faggiani, Robson Brino ; De Mathis, Maria Eugênia Simões ; McIlvane, William J.</creatorcontrib><description>Past research has demonstrated emergent conditional relations using a go/no‐go procedure with pairs of figures displayed side‐by‐side on a computer screen. The present study sought to extend applications of this procedure. In Experiment 1, we evaluated whether emergent conditional relations could be demonstrated when two‐component stimuli were displayed in figure—ground relationships— figures displayed on backgrounds of different colors. Five normally capable adults participated. During training, each two‐component stimulus was presented successively. Responses emitted in the presence of some stimulus pairs (A1B1, A2B2, A3B3, B1C1, B2C2 and B3C3) were reinforced, whereas responses emitted in the presence of other pairs (A1B2, A1B3, A2B1, A2B3, A3B1, A3B2, B1C2, B1C3, B2C1, B2C3, B3C1 and B3C2) were not. During tests, new configurations (AC and CA) were presented, thus emulating structurally the matching‐to‐sample tests employed in typical equivalence studies. All participants showed emergent relations consistent with stimulus equivalence during testing. In Experiment 2, we systematically replicated the procedures with stimulus compounds consisting of four figures (A1, A2, C1 and C2) and two locations (left — B1 and right — B2). All 6 normally capable adults exhibited emergent stimulus—stimulus relations. Together, these experiments show that the go/no‐go procedure is a potentially useful alternative for studying emergent conditional relations when matching‐to‐sample is procedurally cumbersome or impossible to use.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-5002</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-3711</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2009.92-233</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20354601</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JEABAU</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Adults ; Attention ; Behavior ; button press ; Choice Behavior ; Color Perception ; compound stimuli ; Computers ; conditional discrimination ; Conditioning ; Conditioning, Classical ; Discrimination Learning ; Emergencies ; Evaluation Methods ; Experiments ; Female ; figure-ground ; go/no-go procedure ; Humans ; Intelligence Tests ; Judgment ; Logical Thinking ; Male ; Neuropsychological Tests ; Outcomes of Education ; Reinforcement Schedule ; Software ; Stimuli ; stimulus equivalence ; Studies ; Teaching Methods ; Training ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 2009-09, Vol.92 (2), p.233-243</ispartof><rights>2009 Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior</rights><rights>Copyright Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior Sep 2009</rights><rights>Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5599-5bf174c5225efb7169c91ed71a01e383144aab68d92df394cfb32574f15d0e763</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5599-5bf174c5225efb7169c91ed71a01e383144aab68d92df394cfb32574f15d0e763</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2732330/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2732330/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,687,723,776,780,881,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20354601$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ862936$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Debert, Paula</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huziwara, Edson M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Faggiani, Robson Brino</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Mathis, Maria Eugênia Simões</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McIlvane, William J.</creatorcontrib><title>EMERGENT CONDITIONAL RELATIONS IN A GO/NO-GO PROCEDURE: FIGURE-GROUND AND STIMULUS-POSITION COMPOUND RELATIONS</title><title>Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior</title><addtitle>J Exp Anal Behav</addtitle><description>Past research has demonstrated emergent conditional relations using a go/no‐go procedure with pairs of figures displayed side‐by‐side on a computer screen. The present study sought to extend applications of this procedure. In Experiment 1, we evaluated whether emergent conditional relations could be demonstrated when two‐component stimuli were displayed in figure—ground relationships— figures displayed on backgrounds of different colors. Five normally capable adults participated. During training, each two‐component stimulus was presented successively. Responses emitted in the presence of some stimulus pairs (A1B1, A2B2, A3B3, B1C1, B2C2 and B3C3) were reinforced, whereas responses emitted in the presence of other pairs (A1B2, A1B3, A2B1, A2B3, A3B1, A3B2, B1C2, B1C3, B2C1, B2C3, B3C1 and B3C2) were not. During tests, new configurations (AC and CA) were presented, thus emulating structurally the matching‐to‐sample tests employed in typical equivalence studies. All participants showed emergent relations consistent with stimulus equivalence during testing. In Experiment 2, we systematically replicated the procedures with stimulus compounds consisting of four figures (A1, A2, C1 and C2) and two locations (left — B1 and right — B2). All 6 normally capable adults exhibited emergent stimulus—stimulus relations. Together, these experiments show that the go/no‐go procedure is a potentially useful alternative for studying emergent conditional relations when matching‐to‐sample is procedurally cumbersome or impossible to use.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Adults</subject><subject>Attention</subject><subject>Behavior</subject><subject>button press</subject><subject>Choice Behavior</subject><subject>Color Perception</subject><subject>compound stimuli</subject><subject>Computers</subject><subject>conditional discrimination</subject><subject>Conditioning</subject><subject>Conditioning, Classical</subject><subject>Discrimination Learning</subject><subject>Emergencies</subject><subject>Evaluation Methods</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>figure-ground</subject><subject>go/no-go procedure</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intelligence Tests</subject><subject>Judgment</subject><subject>Logical Thinking</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Neuropsychological Tests</subject><subject>Outcomes of Education</subject><subject>Reinforcement Schedule</subject><subject>Software</subject><subject>Stimuli</subject><subject>stimulus equivalence</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Teaching Methods</subject><subject>Training</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0022-5002</issn><issn>1938-3711</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><sourceid>GA5</sourceid><recordid>eNqFks-PlDAUxxujccfRuwdjiAc9MdsfQKkHE2RYZMPACEP22BQoysjACjPq_veWZSXuHvTQ9iXv-_3k9ZsHwEsEV4hBdL6XIl9hCNmKYR0T8ggsECO2TihCj8ECQox1U91n4Nkw7FXBLIqfgjMMiWlYEC1A6228xPeinebG0TrYBXHkhFrihc5YploQaY7mx-dRrPuxtk1i11tnifdeuwh89ep-EmfRWnPUSXfBJguzVN_G6S1IITfb2_bMew6eVKIZ5Iu7dwmyC2_nftLD2A9cJ9QL02RMN_MKUaMwMTZllVNksYIhWVIkIJLEJsgwhMgtu2S4rAgziion2KRGhcwSSmqRJfgwca9P-UGWhWyPvWj4dV8fRH_DO1Hz-522_sq_dD84pkTlCBXg1QSQfV3MPu_StjAjI__dHb_vvp_kcOSHeihk04hWdqeBU6KmZETRluDtP5UYYUghY0r45oFw3536VqWkNIaNLcpsJYKTqOi7YehlNY-GIB9Xgo8rwceV4Axz9RVlef13FLPhzw4ogTUJftaNvPkvkF96zkcyxrAE-mSsh6P8NRtF_41blFCTX0U-_8ywmxpXWxXJb9rGx3w</recordid><startdate>200909</startdate><enddate>200909</enddate><creator>Debert, Paula</creator><creator>Huziwara, Edson M.</creator><creator>Faggiani, Robson Brino</creator><creator>De Mathis, Maria Eugênia Simões</creator><creator>McIlvane, William J.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior</general><general>Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>GA5</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200909</creationdate><title>EMERGENT CONDITIONAL RELATIONS IN A GO/NO-GO PROCEDURE: FIGURE-GROUND AND STIMULUS-POSITION COMPOUND RELATIONS</title><author>Debert, Paula ; Huziwara, Edson M. ; Faggiani, Robson Brino ; De Mathis, Maria Eugênia Simões ; McIlvane, William J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5599-5bf174c5225efb7169c91ed71a01e383144aab68d92df394cfb32574f15d0e763</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Adults</topic><topic>Attention</topic><topic>Behavior</topic><topic>button press</topic><topic>Choice Behavior</topic><topic>Color Perception</topic><topic>compound stimuli</topic><topic>Computers</topic><topic>conditional discrimination</topic><topic>Conditioning</topic><topic>Conditioning, Classical</topic><topic>Discrimination Learning</topic><topic>Emergencies</topic><topic>Evaluation Methods</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>figure-ground</topic><topic>go/no-go procedure</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intelligence Tests</topic><topic>Judgment</topic><topic>Logical Thinking</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Neuropsychological Tests</topic><topic>Outcomes of Education</topic><topic>Reinforcement Schedule</topic><topic>Software</topic><topic>Stimuli</topic><topic>stimulus equivalence</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Teaching Methods</topic><topic>Training</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Debert, Paula</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huziwara, Edson M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Faggiani, Robson Brino</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Mathis, Maria Eugênia Simões</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McIlvane, William J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC - Full Text Only (Discovery)</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Debert, Paula</au><au>Huziwara, Edson M.</au><au>Faggiani, Robson Brino</au><au>De Mathis, Maria Eugênia Simões</au><au>McIlvane, William J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ862936</ericid><atitle>EMERGENT CONDITIONAL RELATIONS IN A GO/NO-GO PROCEDURE: FIGURE-GROUND AND STIMULUS-POSITION COMPOUND RELATIONS</atitle><jtitle>Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior</jtitle><addtitle>J Exp Anal Behav</addtitle><date>2009-09</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>92</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>233</spage><epage>243</epage><pages>233-243</pages><issn>0022-5002</issn><eissn>1938-3711</eissn><coden>JEABAU</coden><abstract>Past research has demonstrated emergent conditional relations using a go/no‐go procedure with pairs of figures displayed side‐by‐side on a computer screen. The present study sought to extend applications of this procedure. In Experiment 1, we evaluated whether emergent conditional relations could be demonstrated when two‐component stimuli were displayed in figure—ground relationships— figures displayed on backgrounds of different colors. Five normally capable adults participated. During training, each two‐component stimulus was presented successively. Responses emitted in the presence of some stimulus pairs (A1B1, A2B2, A3B3, B1C1, B2C2 and B3C3) were reinforced, whereas responses emitted in the presence of other pairs (A1B2, A1B3, A2B1, A2B3, A3B1, A3B2, B1C2, B1C3, B2C1, B2C3, B3C1 and B3C2) were not. During tests, new configurations (AC and CA) were presented, thus emulating structurally the matching‐to‐sample tests employed in typical equivalence studies. All participants showed emergent relations consistent with stimulus equivalence during testing. In Experiment 2, we systematically replicated the procedures with stimulus compounds consisting of four figures (A1, A2, C1 and C2) and two locations (left — B1 and right — B2). All 6 normally capable adults exhibited emergent stimulus—stimulus relations. Together, these experiments show that the go/no‐go procedure is a potentially useful alternative for studying emergent conditional relations when matching‐to‐sample is procedurally cumbersome or impossible to use.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>20354601</pmid><doi>10.1901/jeab.2009.92-233</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0022-5002 |
| ispartof | Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 2009-09, Vol.92 (2), p.233-243 |
| issn | 0022-5002 1938-3711 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2732330 |
| source | MEDLINE; ERIC - Full Text Only (Discovery); Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central |
| subjects | Adolescent Adult Adults Attention Behavior button press Choice Behavior Color Perception compound stimuli Computers conditional discrimination Conditioning Conditioning, Classical Discrimination Learning Emergencies Evaluation Methods Experiments Female figure-ground go/no-go procedure Humans Intelligence Tests Judgment Logical Thinking Male Neuropsychological Tests Outcomes of Education Reinforcement Schedule Software Stimuli stimulus equivalence Studies Teaching Methods Training Young Adult |
| title | EMERGENT CONDITIONAL RELATIONS IN A GO/NO-GO PROCEDURE: FIGURE-GROUND AND STIMULUS-POSITION COMPOUND RELATIONS |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T16%3A14%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=EMERGENT%20CONDITIONAL%20RELATIONS%20IN%20A%20GO/NO-GO%20PROCEDURE:%20FIGURE-GROUND%20AND%20STIMULUS-POSITION%20COMPOUND%20RELATIONS&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20the%20experimental%20analysis%20of%20behavior&rft.au=Debert,%20Paula&rft.date=2009-09&rft.volume=92&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=233&rft.epage=243&rft.pages=233-243&rft.issn=0022-5002&rft.eissn=1938-3711&rft.coden=JEABAU&rft_id=info:doi/10.1901/jeab.2009.92-233&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1857365321%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=214826798&rft_id=info:pmid/20354601&rft_ericid=EJ862936&rfr_iscdi=true |