The relationship between stimulus equivalence and verbal behavior.
Stimulus equivalence and verbal behavior overlap but are not twins—use each label with care.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The authors compared two sets of terms. One set comes from stimulus equivalence. The other set comes from verbal behavior.
They drew maps to show where the terms overlap and where they split. No new data were collected.
What they found
Stimulus equivalence and verbal behavior share ideas, but they are not the same tool kit.
Some relations that look equal in one field do not count as verbal in the other.
How this fits with other research
Arntzen et al. (2020) took the equivalence rules and taught adults to sort foods by carbs. Their success shows the 1991 map is useful in real lessons.
Debert et al. (2009) showed that people can form equivalence classes without matching-to-sample. They used Go/No-Go instead, proving the idea works under new procedures.
Gilroy (2022) also played with equivalence, but in math models of demand. The topic differs, yet the same "check for hidden sameness" spirit links the two papers.
Why it matters
When you plan lessons, pick the right lens. If you want emergent untaught relations, think equivalence. If you want speaker or listener roles, think verbal behavior. Clear labels help you choose the best probe and avoid mixed data.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Before your next language lesson, list each target as either "equivalence relation" or "verbal operant" and pick the probe that matches.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Despite the apparent similarity between stimulus equivalence and verbal behavior, these phenomena have been described in different terms. With different terminologies for each phenomenon, the precise nature of their relationship is difficult to determine. To explore this relationship, this paper first defines stimulus equivalence using a synthesis of the mathematical definition of the equivalence relation and Sidman and Tailby's (1982) definition. Selected examples of stimulus equivalence are then described as verbal behavior using Skinner's (1957) terminology. The paper then cites instances of verbal behavior that cannot be described as stimulus equivalence and considers whether there are instances of stimulus equivalence that cannot be described as verbal behavior.
The Analysis of verbal behavior, 1991 · doi:10.1007/BF03392865