Flexibilidad cognitiva y control contextual de clases de equivalencia de estímulos según la naturaleza de las claves contextuales

Mariana Arismendi, Alberto Iorio

Resumen


El control contextual de clases de equivalencia de estímulos (CEE) emerge de discriminaciones condicionales (DC) de segundo orden, donde un estímulo puede pertenecer a diferentes CEE según el contexto, permitiendo estudiar experimentalmente conductas flexibles. La prueba de clasificación de cartas de Wisconsin (WCST) también evalúa flexibilidad cognitiva, aunque mediante criterios no arbitrarios. En este estudio se evaluó el desempeño de 52 participantes en una tarea de DC de segundo orden, utilizando claves contextuales de diferente naturaleza (arbitrarias/verbales), y se lo comparó con su rendimiento en la WCST. Se observó que, si bien las claves verbales adquirieron su función contextual más rápidamente que las arbitrarias, no impactaron diferencialmente sobre el control contextual de CEE. Se encontraron fuertes asociaciones entre los rendimientos en ambas tareas. Los resultados son interpretados considerando diferencias en la arbitrariedad de los estímulos y la conveniencia de utilizar procedimientos rigurosos en la evaluación de la flexibilidad relacional.

Palabras clave: Control contextual, clases de equivalencia de estímulos, claves arbitrarias, flexibilidad relacional.

Cognitive flexibility and contextual control of stimulus equivalence classes according to the nature of contextual cues. Contextual control of stimuli equivalence classes (SEC) emerges from second order conditional discriminations (CD): in this procedure, a stimulus can belong to different SEC according to the context. This characteristic allows the experimental study of flexible behaviors. The Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) also assesses cognitive flexibility, though by non-arbitrary criteria. In this study, the performance of 52 participants in a second-order CD task was evaluated, using contextual cues of different nature (arbitrary / verbal), and compared with their performance in the WCST. The results showed that, although verbal keys acquired their contextual function more readily than the arbitrary ones, they did not have a differential impact on the contextual control of SEC. Strong associations between performances in both tasks were observed. The results are discussed in terms of differences in the arbitrariness of the stimuli and the convenience of using rigorous procedures in the evaluation of relational flexibility.

Keywords:Contextual control, stimulus equivalence classes, arbitrary cues, relational flexibility


Texto completo:

PDF

Referencias


American Psychological Association (2016). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Arntzen, E., Grondahl, T., & Eilifsen, C. (2010). The effects of different training structures in the establishment of conditional discriminations and subsequent performance on tests for stimulus equivalence. The Psychological Record, 60(3), 437-462. doi:10.1007/BF03395720

Bortoloti, R., Rodrigues, N. C., Cortez, M. D., Pimentel, N., & de Rose, J. C. (2013). Overtraining increases the strength of equivalence relations. Psychology & Neuroscience, 6(3), 357-364. doi: 10.3922/j.psns.2013.3.13

Burin, D., Drake, M., & Harris, P. (2007). Evaluación neuropsicológica en adultos. Bs. As: Paidós SAICF.

Delgado, D., & Hayes, L. (2007). The acquisition of a conceptual repertoire: An analysis in terms of substitution of functions. The Behavior Analyst Today, 8(3), 59-68. doi: 10.1037/h0100622

Dymond, S. (2014). Meaning is more than associations: relational operants and the search for derived relations in nonhumans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 101(1), 152-155. doi: 10.1002/jeab.57

Hayes, S. C., & Long, D. M. (2013). Contextual Behavioral Science, evolution, and scientific epistemology. En S. Dymond, & B. Roche (Eds.), Advances in Relational Frame Theory. Research & Application. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.

Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). Relational frame theory: A précis. En S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, & B. Roche (Eds.), Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition (pp. 141-154). New York: Plenum Press.

Hayes, S. C., White, D., & Bissett, R. T. (1998). Protocol analysis and the “silent dog” method of analyzing the impact of self-generated rules. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 15(1), 57–63. doi: 10.1007/BF03392923

Healy, O., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Smeets, P. M. (2000). Derived relational responding as generalized operant behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74(2), 207-227. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2000.74-207

Heaton, R. K., Chelune, G. J., Talley, J. L., Kay, G. G., & Curtiss, G. (1993). Wisconsin card sorting test manual: Revised and expanded. Odessa, Fl: Psychological Assessment Resources Inc.

Jurado, M. B., & Rosselli, M. (2007). The elusive nature of executive functions: a review of our current understanding. Neuropsychology Review, 17(3), 213–233. doi: 10.1007/s11065-007-9040-z

Lionello-DeNolf, K. M. (2012). Learning of stimulus equivalence classes. En N. M. Seel (Ed.) Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning (pp. 1955-1957). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.

Lionello-DeNolf, K. M., & Dube, W. V. (2011). Contextual influences on resistance to disruption in children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 96(3), 317-327. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2011.96-317

Mensah, J., & Arntzen, E. (2016). Effects of meaningful stimuli contained in different numbers of classes on equivalence class formation. The Psychological Record, 67(3), 1-12. doi: 10.1007/s40732-016-0215-y

Mizael, T. M., de Almeida, J. H., Silveira, C. C., & de Rose, J. C. (2016). Changing racial bias by transfer of function in equivalence classes. The Psychological Record, 66(3), 451-462. doi: 10.1007/s40732-016-0185-0

Pérez, W. F., Fidalgo, A. P., Kovac, R., & Nico, Y. C. (2015). The transfer of Cfunc contextual control through equivalence relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 103(3), 511-523. doi: 10.1002/jeab.150

Randell, T., & Remington, B. (2006). Equivalence Relations, Contextual Control, and Naming. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 86(3), 337–354. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2006.82-05

Rehfeldt, R. A. (2003). Establishing contextual control over generalized equivalence relations. The Psychological Record, 53(3), 415-428.

Sidman, M. (1986). Functional analysis of emergent verbal classes. En T. Thompson & M. D. Zeiler (Eds.), Analysis and integration of behavioral units (pp. 213–245). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Sidman, M. (2000). Equivalence relations and the reinforcement contingency. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74(1), 127–146. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2000.74-127

Stewart, I., Barrett, K., McHugh, L., Barnes-Holmes, D., & O’Hora, D. (2013). Multiple contextual control over non-arbitrary relational responding and a preliminary model of pragmatic verbal analysis. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 100(2), 174–186. doi: 10.1002/jeab.39




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30882/1852.4206.v10.n2.19459

Copyright (c) 2018 Revista Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento