Multiple contextual control over non-arbitrary relational responding and a preliminary model of pragmatic verbal analysis.
After brief equivalence training, a meaningless shape can tell adults which real-world property to respond to—no extra instructions needed.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Stewart et al. (2013) worked with neurotypical adults in a lab.
They first taught three arbitrary shapes (B, C) to act as symbols for "same," "opposite," "more," and "less."
Next they used match-to-sample trials to build equivalence classes that included these symbols.
Finally they asked participants to pick the "bigger" or "smaller" of two real objects while one of the arbitrary symbols hovered above the screen.
The question: would the abstract symbol now control which real-world dimension people noticed?
What they found
The arbitrary cues won.
When the symbol that meant "more" appeared, participants chose the physically larger object.
When the symbol that meant "opposite" appeared, they chose the smaller one.
No one was taught these final choices; the control came from the earlier equivalence training.
How this fits with other research
Perez et al. (2017) widened the same idea to four relational words: same, opposite, more, less.
Their adults also picked up the cues through equivalence, showing the effect is not limited to one lab.
Guinther (2018) moved the trick into the social world.
After equivalence training, a colored square made adults suddenly infer another person’s false belief—proof that contextual control can reach perspective-taking.
The 2013 study sits in the middle: it gave the first clean model of how an abstract cue, once equivalent, can flip which real-world feature we respond to.
Why it matters
You can build new switches in your learner’s environment without extra drills.
Teach a tiny symbol (or color, or sound) to join an equivalence class that already means "bigger," "quieter," or "finished."
Then place that cue in new tasks; the learner’s response may flip on its own.
Next time you want a child to notice volume instead of color, or wait instead of grab, try letting an equivalence-trained cue do the heavy lifting.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one abstract symbol, teach it to mean "bigger" through equivalence, then test if it later guides size choices with new objects.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The aims of the current study were (i) to explore the flexibility and generalizability of non-arbitrary relational contextual control in human participants and (ii) to provide a simple empirical model of pragmatic verbal analysis, a key element in the relational frame theory approach to problem solving. Participants were trained to respond to abstract shapes as cues for responding in accordance with non-arbitrary relations of sameness, difference and opposition. Next, sameness, difference and opposition relational responding was brought under additional contextual control by arbitrary B1-B3 stimuli, such that, depending on the B stimulus presented, relational responding was applied to one of three distinct physical dimensions of multidimensional shapes. Equivalence training and testing was then provided such that participants showed derived relations between the B stimuli and three novel arbitrary C stimuli. Two additional cues were then trained such that they occasioned comparative (more/less) relations. A final test showed that the C stimuli exerted contextual control over physical dimensions in the novel context of more/less/same non-arbitrary relational responding. These findings provide a simple, preliminary model of pragmatic verbal analysis.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 2013 · doi:10.1002/jeab.39