Equivalence class establishment, expansion, and modification in preschool children.
Preschoolers can build, grow, and even flip equivalence classes if the task keeps the same picture in the same spot.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team worked with preschoolers who had no diagnosis.
Kids learned four two-choice matching games with made-up shapes.
Same shapes stayed on the screen as the correct choice each time.
Later the researchers added new shapes and flipped some rules.
They watched to see if the children’s groups of "same" pictures held together.
What they found
Children built the classes quickly when the layout never changed.
They also added new pictures to the group without extra teaching.
Most kids even flipped the whole class when the correct choice swapped sides.
In short, preschool minds can build, grow, and turn around equivalence sets.
How this fits with other research
Lerman et al. (1995) saw the same flip task four years earlier.
Only two of five kids in that study managed any re-sorting.
The difference: C’s team changed which picture was correct on every trial.
R’s team kept the same picture in the same spot, making the flip easier.
So young children can reverse classes, but only if the task stays simple.
Arntzen et al. (2018) later showed adults need a short delay warm-up to reorganize.
The preschool brain can do it without help, provided the screen layout is stable.
Why it matters
Keep your match-to-sample layout consistent during early lessons.
If you must swap the correct picture, do it slowly and probe for class breaks.
Watch for accidental reversals when you add new items.
A steady screen gives you faster equivalence gains and fewer tears.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Keep the correct comparison in the same screen location for the first week of equivalence lessons.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Preschool children were taught four two-choice match-to-sample conditional discriminations with 10 arbitrary visual stimuli. For 6 participants, 2 of the 10 stimuli served as the sample, or conditional, stimuli in all discriminations. For 5 additional participants, the same pair of stimuli served as the discriminative, or comparison, stimuli in all discriminations. Equivalence classes were established with more participants in the latter group, replicating prior research with participants with retardation. Four participants, in whom equivalence classes were established and who were available for further participation, were exposed to new conditional discriminations without trial-by-trial feedback and involving some novel and some familiar stimuli. Consistent conditional responding was observed, and tests for inclusion of the novel stimuli in the original classes showed class expansion. Training to reverse the unreinforced conditional performances produced a reversal of class membership in 3 of 4 participants, an outcome not consistent with other studies. The results are discussed with respect to the interaction of class structure and size.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1999 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1999.71-195