Derived Relational Responding and Transformations of Function in Children: A Review of Applied Behavior-Analytic Journals.
Half of child DRR studies already target useful language, but most stop at simple sameness—build opposite, comparison, and transformation probes into your next program.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Belisle et al. (2020) read every child study on derived relational responding published in ABA journals. They found 123 papers and counted how many taught real-life verbal skills and how many tested if the skill spread to new words or situations.
The team did not pool effect sizes. They simply mapped the field to see what researchers had and had not tried.
What they found
About half of the studies (55 %) aimed at useful language such as naming objects or answering questions. Only 47 % checked if the child could use the new skill with untrained words or in new places.
Most papers stayed with simple same–same relations. Fewer tried harder frames like opposite, bigger–smaller, or before–after.
How this fits with other research
Gibbs et al. (2023) narrowed the lens to kids with autism or IDD. They also found children can learn relations beyond sameness, but warn most studies are small and weak. Their message matches Jordan’s call for tougher tests.
Kydd et al. (1982) is an early example Jordan would have coded. Teens learned A-B and C-B matches and then showed untrained B-A, B-C, A-C, C-A without extra teaching. The skill is not new, yet we still run too many simple drills.
Becraft et al. (2024) used the same scoping method on caregiver roles. Both reviews show ABA journals rich in data, but each topic has blind spots we can fix.
Why it matters
When you write a verbal program, move past “same as” cards. Add opposite, comparative, and time relations. After teaching, probe with brand-new words and real settings. One extra generalization test tells you if the child truly owns the skill or just the drill.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Take one mastered coordination set and add two new cards that show “opposite of” the trained pair; probe for emergent responses tomorrow.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Theoretical extensions of Skinner's verbal behavior that emphasize derived relational responding (stimulus equivalence, relational frame theory, and bidirectional naming) can improve the complexity and scope of applied behavior-analytic training models with children. We evaluated the prevalence and content of empirical research on derived relational responding in children within 8 major applied behavior-analytic journals. We identified 123 empirical articles that met all inclusion criteria (i.e., they demonstrated derived relational responding in children). Whereas prior citation analyses have shown higher rates of research with adult participants, considerable research within these journals has involved child participants. In addition, 55% of the research targeted socially relevant or culturally established verbal relations, rather than culturally arbitrary relations (e.g., unknown symbols, consonant-vowel-consonant combinations) that are unlikely to affect real-world behavior. Generalization and transformation tests were also present in 47% of articles. We also conducted a content analysis of all articles that contained culturally relevant relations and demonstrated generalization or transformation of stimulus function (21% of all articles, N = 26); we argue that studies that meet these criteria are likely to be the most immediately impactful for learners. Results suggest that future research is needed to evaluate relational frames other than coordination (e.g., distinction, opposition), as well as to extend considerably the complexity of target relational classes and transformations of stimulus function with children.
The Analysis of verbal behavior, 2020 · doi:10.1901/jaba.2010.43-181