Relational Frame Theory (RFT)

This chapter introduces the origins of, as well as arguments and evidence for, relational frame theory (RFT). It presents the study of arbitrarily applicable relational responding (AARR) to its historical roots and explains why this phenomenon has occupied the attention of behavioral scientists for over 40 years now. The chapter highlights a number of features of relational responding that becomes important when linking RFT to language and cognition later on. It examines how RFT carves this type of operant behavior into two different varieties (nonarbitrarily and arbitrarily applicable) and discusses how the latter may not only provide an explanation for stimulus equivalence, but for other types of derived stimulus relations as well. The chapter focuses on relational coherence, complexity, and levels of derivation in RFT is serving to inject a much needed emphasis on the role of reinforcement contingencies in understanding AARR.

Learning can be defined functionally as the impact of regularities in the environment on behavior. The concept of environmental regularities is a crucial part of this definition because it (a) improves the scope and depth of the definition and (b) provides ways to differentiate between different types of learning. We argue that this concept is useful also for conceptualizing learning from the perspective of Relational Frame Theory. More specifically, even if all instances of learning qualify as instances of arbitrarily applicable relational responding, different types of learning could still be functionally different because they involve different types of proximal regularities.

To find the full text version of this article and others (as well as download a full text .pdf.), ACBS members can visit the ScienceDirect homepage here.

Cognitive neuroscience has developed many approaches to the study of learning that might be useful to functionally oriented researchers, including those from a relational frame theory (RFT) perspective. We focus here on two examples. First, cognitive neuroscience often distinguishes between habit and goal-directed reinforcement learning, in which only the latter is sensitive to proximal changes in behavior-environment contingencies. This distinction is relevant to RFT’s original concerns about how rule-based processes can sometimes render an individual’s behavior maladaptive to changing circumstances. Second, the discovery of neurophysiological structures associated with fear extinction and generalization can potentially yield new insights for derived relational responding research. In particular, we review how such work not only informs new ways of modifying the functions transformed in derived relational responding, but also new ways of measuring derived relational responding itself. Overall, therefore, existing conceptual and methodological advances in the cognitive neuroscience literature addressing learning appear to generate functionally interesting predictions related to RFT that might not have surfaced from a traditional functional analysis of behavior.

To find the full text version of this article and others (as well as download a full text .pdf.), ACBS members can visit the ScienceDirect homepage here.

Relational Frame Theory (RFT) is a contemporary account of language and cognition rooted in behavior analysis. This paper presents a citation analysis of the RFT literature that follows on from that conducted by Dymond, May, Munnelly and Hoon (2010) who examined the evidence base for and impact of RFT between 1991 and 2008. The current analysis focused on Empirical and Non-Empirical studies citing RFT-related search terms and their publishing outlets in the period from 2009 to 2016. An emphasis was placed on Empirical RFT articles, which were organized by frames targeted, country of origin and participant demographics. The analysis revealed 521 papers that met inclusion criteria. Of these 288 (55.3%) were Empirical and 233 (44.7%) were Non-Empirical. The Empirical category included 160 (30.7%) Empirical RFT and 128 (24.6%) Empirical Other. The Non-Empirical category included 110 (21.1%) Review and 123 (23.6%) Conceptual. This analysis provides further evidence of substantial growth in RFT research.

To find the full text version of this article and others (as well as download a full text .pdf.), ACBS members can visit the ScienceDirect homepage here.

The current article argues that the conceptual analysis of metaphor as offered by relational frame theory (RFT) illustrates one way in which the theory may be integrated with, and have a constructive influence on, acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT). The article walks though a basic account of metaphor as the relating of relations and summarises the empirical evidence in support of this conceptualization. This understanding is then applied to a number of metaphors that are common to ACT in an attempt to illustrate how the RFT account of metaphor may be useful in aiding ACT practitioners to construct and deconstruct clinical metaphors.

To find the full text version of this article and others (as well as download a full text .pdf.), ACBS members can visit the ScienceDirect homepage here.