| id |
ndltd-NEU--neu-523
|
| record_format |
oai_dc
|
| spelling |
ndltd-NEU--neu-5232021-05-26T05:10:15ZComparing two procedures to teach conditional discriminations: simple discriminations with and without S- stimuli present.The present study systematically replicated Gutierrez et al. (2009) in which two methods of teaching a conditional auditory-visual discrimination were examined. Gutierrez evaluated relations taught either with or without an S- stimulus present during teaching. After teaching, a test of conditional discrimination was performed with all the taught relations. The authors found that sessions to mastery of the conditional discrimination were slightly higher for relations taught with S- stimuli. Although Gutierrez et al. used auditory-visual relations and only two stimuli as comparison stimuli, the author of the present study taught visual-visual relations (state names to state pictures) and three comparison stimuli. In this study, participants reached the mastery criterion for simple discriminations in fewer sessions when S- stimuli were not present; however, during the conditional discrimination task, participants emitted more correct responses when presented with the relations that had been taught in the presence of S- stimuli.http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d20000997
|
| collection |
NDLTD
|
| sources |
NDLTD
|
| description |
The present study systematically replicated Gutierrez et al. (2009) in which two methods of teaching a conditional auditory-visual discrimination were examined. Gutierrez evaluated relations taught either with or without an S- stimulus present during teaching. After teaching, a test of conditional discrimination was performed with all the taught relations. The authors found that sessions to mastery of the conditional discrimination were slightly higher for relations taught
with S- stimuli. Although Gutierrez et al. used auditory-visual relations and only two stimuli as comparison stimuli, the author of the present study taught visual-visual relations (state names to state pictures) and three comparison stimuli. In this study, participants reached the mastery criterion for simple discriminations in fewer sessions when S- stimuli were not present; however, during the conditional discrimination task, participants emitted more correct responses when presented
with the relations that had been taught in the presence of S- stimuli.
|
| title |
Comparing two procedures to teach conditional discriminations: simple discriminations with and without S- stimuli present.
|
| spellingShingle |
Comparing two procedures to teach conditional discriminations: simple discriminations with and without S- stimuli present.
|
| title_short |
Comparing two procedures to teach conditional discriminations: simple discriminations with and without S- stimuli present.
|
| title_full |
Comparing two procedures to teach conditional discriminations: simple discriminations with and without S- stimuli present.
|
| title_fullStr |
Comparing two procedures to teach conditional discriminations: simple discriminations with and without S- stimuli present.
|
| title_full_unstemmed |
Comparing two procedures to teach conditional discriminations: simple discriminations with and without S- stimuli present.
|
| title_sort |
comparing two procedures to teach conditional discriminations: simple discriminations with and without s- stimuli present.
|
| publishDate |
|
| url |
http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d20000997
|
| _version_ |
1719406329944080384
|
