Evaluating the establishment and maintenance of visual-visual and gustatory-visual equivalence relations in adults with developmental disabilities.

Anne and her team worked with four adults who had developmental delays. Each adult already knew the names of common foods and objects.

The staff taught two kinds of conditional matches. One kind paired pictures with other pictures (visual-visual). The other kind paired a real taste with its picture and printed name (gustatory-visual).

They used tabletop trials and praise. After training, they tested if the adults could mix the items into new, untaught pairs—proof of an equivalence class.

Taste-to-word links were learned faster and stayed strong 30–40 days later. Picture-to-word links took more trials and faded faster.

On the first big equivalence test, picture classes scored a little higher. Still, the taste classes held steady over time while the picture classes dropped off.

McKeel et al. (2017) later used the PEAK program to teach the same taste-picture-word links. Their adults with autism picked up the final links without direct training—an extension of Anne’s core idea.

Chawner et al. (2019) reviewed feeding studies and found most used learning-theory pieces like the ones Anne tested. Her gustatory work sits inside that larger toolbox for expanding food acceptance.

Amore et al. (2011) and Volkert et al. (2025) also deal with taste, but they aim for more bites or tube weans, not mental links. Anne’s paper is the root that shows tastes can enter equivalence classes at all.

If you want durable concept nets for food safety, meal planning, or symbolic communication, start with real tastes. A quick taste trial now can save re-teaching time next month. Try pairing a new food’s taste with its picture and written name before you ask for any bites—your equivalence test might stick longer than a picture-only lesson.