Establishing fraction-decimal equivalence using a respondent-type trainingprocedure.

Citation
G. Leader et D. Barnes-holmes, Establishing fraction-decimal equivalence using a respondent-type trainingprocedure., PSYCHOL REC, 51(1), 2001, pp. 151-165
Citations number
21
Categorie Soggetti
Psycology
Journal title
PSYCHOLOGICAL RECORD
ISSN journal
00332933 → ACNP
Volume
51
Issue
1
Year of publication
2001
Pages
151 - 165
Database
ISI
SICI code
0033-2933(200124)51:1<151:EFEUAR>2.0.ZU;2-F
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to teach children fraction-decimal equivalenc e using the respondent-type training procedure and test for any emergent ge neralization. In the first experiment, subjects were respondently trained o n the conditional discriminations; A1-->B1, A2-->B2, and tested B1-A1, B2-A 2. Subjects were then trained on the conditional discriminations C1-->B1, C 2-->B2 and tested B1-C1, B2-C2. Subjects were subsequently tested for the e mergence of the untrained relations A-C and C-A. When subjects were present ed with the Stimulus Al they observed 1/4 and when subjects were presented with A2 they observed 2/4. When subjects were presented with B1 they observ ed a circle with the upper left quarter shaded and when subjects were prese nted with B2 they observed a circle divided into four quarters with the upp er half shaded. When subjects were presented with C1 they observed 0.25 and when subjects were presented with C2 they observed 0.50. Experiment 2 was identical to Experiment 1 except that subjects were administered three gene ralization tests. In Generalization Test Number 1, the Stimuli Al, A2, C1, and C2 served as samples and shapes not seen in training but with the same shaded areas served as comparison stimuli. Generalization Test No. 2 was id entical to the previous test, except that the comparison stimuli consisted of a shape not seen in training and the shaded area was altered. Generaliza tion Test No. 3 was identical to the previous two tests except that the com parison stimuli were altered in that the number of shaded and unshaded area s was increased. Experiment 3 was identical to Experiment 2 except that an extra generalization test was added to the experiment. This test was identi cal to Generalization Test No. 3 of Experiment 2, except that the shaded ar eas were contiguous with each other. In Experiment 1, subjects were success ful on all equivalence tests. In Experiment 2, subjects were successful on all equivalence tests and 50% of subjects successfully completed the final generalization tests. In Experiment 3, subjects were successful on ail equi valence tests and on all generalization tests.