Equivalence relations and the contextual control of multiple derived stimulus functions

Perez et al. (2021) asked: can one cue switch an equivalence stimulus between three jobs?

They taught adults to match shapes into four-member classes. Next, each class got three new jobs. In a blue room, one stimulus meant 'press for points.' In a red room, the same shape meant 'press to avoid losing points.' In a green room, it meant 'points are off—do not press.'

The only thing that changed was the wall color. The shape stayed the same.

The color alone picked the job. In blue, people pressed fast. In red, they pressed to escape. In green, pressing stopped.

All three functions stayed neat within each class. If A1 meant 'get points' in blue, then B1, C1, and D1 also meant 'get points' in blue.

Foti et al. (2015) showed that contextual control can hop through equivalence. They used line patterns and one function. Perez adds two more functions and keeps them separate.

Almeida-Verdu et al. (2008) proved deaf children with cochlear implants can form equivalence classes. Perez shows that, in adults, those classes can hold three opposite jobs at once.

Fields et al. (2018) argued that meaningful stimuli make classes form faster. Perez keeps the stimuli abstract and still gets tight contextual control, so meaning is not required for this feat.

You can teach one symbol set and let the room, tablet frame, or teacher’s shirt pick the current rule. This saves teaching time and keeps the learner’s world simple. Try it next time you fade picture cards between 'ask,' 'wait,' and 'all-done' functions—just change the border color.