Document Type



The purpose of this study was to compare systematically the
effectiveness of the respondent-type training procedure and the
matching-to-sample training procedure. In Experiment 1, a withinsubject
design was used, to compare the effectiveness of the two
procedures. In Condition 1, students were trained using the
respondent-type training procedure (60 training trials) and tested for
the emergence of symmetry and equivalence responding using a
matching-to-sample test. Students were subsequently trained using
the matching-to-sample training procedure (60 training trials) and
tested using a matching-to-sample test. In Condition 2, the order of
the training and testing was reversed (i.e., i, MTS training; ii, MTS
test, iii, respondent training; iv, MTS test). Experiment 2 was identical
to Experiment 1, except that during matching-to-sample training
subjects were required to produce 12 consecutively correct
responses before an equivalence test. During respondent-type
training students were presented with 12 training trials. Experiment 3
was identical to Experiment 2 except that the two negative
comparisons were removed from matching-to-sample training.
Experiment 4 was identical to Experiment 3 except that the correct
comparison appeared to the right, center, or left of the screen and
three response keys were used. In Experiments 1, 2, and 3
respondent-type training was more effective than matching-tosample
training. In Experiment 4 when the negative comparisons
were removed from matching-to-sample training and when the
spatial position of the correct comparison varied both procedures
were equally effective.