Control of adolescents' arbitrary matching-to-sample by positive and negative stimulus relations.

Researchers taught teens with developmental delays to match pictures that had no real link. The teens learned A-B and C-B pairs, then the team tested if they could flip the pairs around without more teaching.

They used a simple matching game on a computer. Correct picks earned tokens the teens could trade for snacks.

Most teens instantly passed the reverse matches. After learning A-B and C-B, they chose B-A, B-C, A-C, and C-A on the first try.

The results showed their choices were controlled by both the taught links and the untaught opposite links.

Gibbs et al. (2023) looked at 38 later studies and found the same thing: kids with delays can form new links without direct teaching. Their review includes this 1982 paper, so the new work builds on it.

Anonymous (1996) and Jones et al. (1992) added a naming step before testing. They saw that teaching one name for all items helped some autistic preschoolers form classes, while the 1982 teens did fine without names. The difference is age and diagnosis, not a clash.

Marcucella et al. (1978) showed that younger, typical kids pick new items just because they are new. The 1982 study moves that idea older and shows choice can be driven by taught rules, not just novelty.

You can build large networks of knowledge for teens with delays without drilling every link. Teach a few arbitrary matches, then test the reverses and diagonals right away. If they pass, move on; if not, add naming or more baseline trials. This saves hours of teaching time and proves real learning, not rote memorization.