Relational Frame Theory (RFT)

Murray Sidman's view of stimulus equivalence as a basic stimulus function, and his preference for a largely procedural approach to the study of equivalence is outlined. Steven Hayes's relational frame account, which considers the equivalence relation as one of a number of derived stimulus functions, is also examined. The empirical implications arising from the main differences between these two accounts are discussed. Although relational frame theory does appear to readily predict at least one equivalence effect that Sidman's approach does not, it is still too early to decide which account is better. Reviewing the differences between these two accounts, however, should help to prevent conceptual and empirical confusion in future research.....

Murray Sidman's view of stimulus equivalence as a basic stimulus function, and his preference for a largely procedural approach to the study of equivalence is outlined. Steven Hayes's relational frame account, which considers the equivalence relation as one of a number of derived stimulus functions, is also examined. The empirical implications arising from the main differences between these two accounts are discussed. Although relational frame theory does appear to readily predict at least one equivalence effect that Sidman's approach does not, it is still too early to decide which account is better. Reviewing the differences between these two accounts, however, should help to prevent conceptual and empirical confusion in future research.....

For a behavior analyst to write about executive function is difficult for two reasons. First, executive function is not a technical category within behavioral psychology. There is virtually no behavioral literature on executive function per se, although Barkley (Chapter 17) and others have drawn from that literature in their technical accounts of the area. Second, it is not at all clear what domain is covered by the term. Our strategy in this chapter is first to examine the kinds of phenomena researchers from other traditions are terming executive function. We then consider what seem to be relevant literatures within basic behavior analysis and lay out a theoretical account that seems to cover these findings. Finally, we apply these analyses to executive function.

For a behavior analyst to write about executive function is difficult for two reasons. First, executive function is not a technical category within behavioral psychology. There is virtually no behavioral literature on executive function per se, although Barkley (Chapter 17) and others have drawn from that literature in their technical accounts of the area. Second, it is not at all clear what domain is covered by the term. Our strategy in this chapter is first to examine the kinds of phenomena researchers from other traditions are terming executive function. We then consider what seem to be relevant literatures within basic behavior analysis and lay out a theoretical account that seems to cover these findings. Finally, we apply these analyses to executive function.

For the past several years I and my colleagues have been developing a new behavior analytic perspective on verbal events, which we term Relational Frame Theory. This approach is housed firmly in the behavior analytic tradition but my experiences in presenting the model suggest that some proponents of that tradition are uncertain about or even worried about Relational Frame Theory. This chapter is about that worry.

For the past several years I and my colleagues have been developing a new behavior analytic perspective on verbal events, which we term Relational Frame Theory. This approach is housed firmly in the behavior analytic tradition but my experiences in presenting the model suggest that some proponents of that tradition are uncertain about or even worried about Relational Frame Theory. This chapter is about that worry.

The article begins with a brief outline of the phenomenon of stimulus equivalence and its relationship to human verbal behavior. Relational frame theory is then outlined as a behavior-analytic account of both stimulus equivalence and human language. The experimental procedures that have typically been used to examine stimulus equivalence are then considered, before focusing on a series of studies that have developed two alternative procedures for analyzing equivalence class formation: the respondent-type training procedure and the precursor to the relational evaluation procedure. Relational Frame Theory is used to interpret the results that have arisen from these two methodologies. The article concludes that the empirical and theoretical analyses of stimulus equivalence and derived relations, more generally, will be enhanced considerably through the development of a wide range of experimental preparations.

The article begins with a brief outline of the phenomenon of stimulus equivalence and its relationship to human verbal behavior. Relational frame theory is then outlined as a behavior-analytic account of both stimulus equivalence and human language. The experimental procedures that have typically been used to examine stimulus equivalence are then considered, before focusing on a series of studies that have developed two alternative procedures for analyzing equivalence class formation: the respondent-type training procedure and the precursor to the relational evaluation procedure. Relational Frame Theory is used to interpret the results that have arisen from these two methodologies. The article concludes that the empirical and theoretical analyses of stimulus equivalence and derived relations, more generally, will be enhanced considerably through the development of a wide range of experimental preparations.