Instructions and stimulus categorizing in a measure of stimulus generalization.
A single spoken label can pull an entire generalization gradient toward basic color categories.
01Research in Context
What this study did
BERRYMAELLIOTT et al. (1962) asked adults to look at colored lights.
Each person first learned one target color by name.
Later they picked the closest match from a rainbow of lights.
The test was repeated several times to see how choices moved.
What they found
People’s picks slid toward the nearest “corner” color.
Red, blue, green, and yellow pulled the whole curve like magnets.
Simply naming the training color made the shift happen.
The gradient moved even though the lights never changed.
How this fits with other research
Bailey (1984) shows the same slide in preschoolers.
Kids who learned stable names for line angles later matched new angles perfectly.
Together the studies say: labels don’t just help memory, they bend perception.
Robinson et al. (1974) seems to disagree.
Their pigeons failed to transfer matching skills across color and shape.
The gap is about control, not conflict.
R et al. used human language; W et al. removed it.
Words open a shortcut for generalization that birds can’t use.
Why it matters
If you teach a learner to name the training item, you are also teaching the brain where to file “close enough.”
The name becomes a magnet that drags future choices toward the category center.
Use this when you want broad transfer without re-teaching every shade, tone, or angle.
Just give the target a clear, stable label and watch the generalization curve slide your way.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick the target stimulus, give it a short name, and have the learner say the name before each trial—then probe untrained variants.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
In Experiment I, three groups of 20 Ss each were exposed to a light of 550 mmu (yellowish-green) for 60 sec and then viewed a random sequence of wavelengths with instructions to respond only to the original color. The instructions given the three groups were worded differently in an attempt to vary the strength of a set-to-discriminate assumed to be created by this procedure. The three groups produced similar gradients, each with a peak of responding at 540 mmu, in agreement with Kalish's (1958) published gradient for the 550 mmu standard stimulus value. It was suggested that the nature of the task is such that a strong discriminatory set is produced regardless of the wording of the instructions.A temporal analysis of the gradient as it develops during the testing revealed that initially the peak of responding occurs at 550 mmu; but as testing progresses, it shifts gradually in the direction of the shorter wavelengths (purer greens). Experiment II was performed to test the generality of the phenomenon of regression to the primary color. Two groups of 20 Ss each were tested for generalization following exposure to 510 mmu (bluish-green) and 525 mmu (pure green), respectively. We predicted that the 510 mmu gradient would reveal a progressive shift toward the longer wavelengths (purer greens), whereas the 525 mmu gradient would show no tendency to shift. The results were strikingly in accord with these predictions. We concluded that although a physiological process could not be ruled out, the verbal labeling of the standard stimulus value may well be responsible for the regression of the gradient toward the primary color.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1962 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1962.5-375