Effects of select and reject control on equivalence class formation and transfer of function.
Pick-the-correct-picture trials build stronger equivalence classes than click-the-wrong-picture trials.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Foti et al. (2015) asked: does it matter if kids pick the right picture because they like it, or because they hate the other one?
They taught college students four-member equivalence classes with abstract shapes. Half the trials forced ‘select control’—the learner had to click the correct S+ shape. The other half forced ‘reject control’—the learner had to click away from the incorrect S- shape.
After training, they tested for symmetry, transitivity, full equivalence, and whether new functions given to one shape spread to the rest of the class.
What they found
Select-control students built complete four-member classes and passed every transfer test.
Reject-control students only showed symmetry (A-B and B-A). They failed transitivity and equivalence probes, and only transferred new functions to the S- shapes they had been rejecting.
How this fits with other research
Taylor et al. (1993) once showed that reject control can build classes. The key difference: they used simpler two-member sets and longer training. So reject control works, but it needs more time and simpler tasks.
Perez et al. (2021) took the strong classes made by select control and proved you can later add contextual cues that turn the same stimuli into approach, escape, or extinction signals. In other words, select control gives you a solid foundation that later studies can build on.
Gallant et al. (2021) compared two select-control formats—standard match-to-sample and yes-no pairing—in real classrooms. Both worked equally well, confirming that select-control procedures translate well from lab to lecture hall.
Why it matters
When you run equivalence-based instruction, start with simple select-control trials: learner clicks the correct S+ picture. Save reject-control (click the wrong one) for extra practice after the class is solid. This small tweak can cut training time and give fuller transfer of new skills.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Begin your next MTS lesson with pure S+ selection trials; add S- rejection probes only after the learner passes symmetry tests.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The present study used a single-subject design to evaluate the effects of select or reject control on equivalence class formation and transfer of function. Adults were exposed to a matching-to-sample task with observing requirements (MTS-OR) in order to bias the establishment of sample/S+ (select) or sample/S- (reject) relations. In Experiment 1, four sets of baseline conditional relations were taught-two under reject control (A1B2C1, A2B1C2) and two under select control (D1E1F1, D2E2F2). Participants were tested for transitivity, symmetry, equivalence and reflexivity. They also learned a simple discrimination involving one of the stimuli from the equivalence classes and were tested for the transfer of the discriminative function. In general, participants performed with high accuracy on all equivalence-related probes as well as the transfer of function probes under select control. Under reject control, participants had high scores only on the symmetry test; transfer of function was attributed to stimuli programmed as S-. In Experiment 2, the equivalence class under reject control was expanded to four members (A1B2C1D2; A2B1C2D1). Participants had high scores only on symmetry and on transitivity and equivalence tests involving two nodes. Transfer of function was extended to the programmed S- added to each class. Results from both experiments suggest that select and reject controls might differently affect the formation of equivalence classes and the transfer of stimulus functions.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 2015 · doi:10.1002/jeab.164