Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Investigates how autoclitics affect class formation through intraverbal naming, suggesting new avenues for understanding symbolic behavior.
This study investigated the influence of autoclitics denoting sameness and opposition on class formation through intraverbal naming, building on the bidirectional naming theory. Four undergraduate participants were exposed to an experimental procedure involving tact training, intraverbal training, and matching-to-sample (MTS) posttests. First, participants were taught to tact all stimuli vocally. Then, stimuli were divided into two sets, and intraverbals were established through spoken words with different autoclitics for each set. The intraverbal included “equal to” (sameness) for Set 1 and “opposite to” (opposition) for Set 2. Then, all emergent relations were tested through both an MTS and a vocal task. As a result, three out of four participants learned the target relations and demonstrated relational responding aligned with predictions, indicating that autoclitic functions played a role in stimulus class formation. One participant exhibited alternative patterns, likely influenced by distinct reinforcement histories regarding the relational autoclitics used. These findings expand on naming theory through the concept of autoclitics by linking autoclitics to the mechanisms underlying verbally mediated equivalence classes. We argue that the concept of autoclitics could enhance our understanding of emergent symbolic behavior.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bernardy et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: