|
pubmed:abstractText |
Recently, two published articles have reported finding stimulus equivalence in nonhumans. One suggested that equivalence was due to the mediation of names. The procedure used trained all components of all tested relations. Because nothing was derived, the defining characteristics of equivalence were not achieved. In the second study a definition of equivalence was proposed that fails to distinguish functional stimulus classes from equivalence classes. The resulting data are not clearly relevant to stimulus equivalence in Sidman's sense of the term. Stimulus equivalence has not yet been shown in nonhumans.
|
