↓ Skip to main content

An evaluation of a visual–visual successive matching‐to‐sample procedure to establish equivalence classes in adults

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
An evaluation of a visual–visual successive matching‐to‐sample procedure to establish equivalence classes in adults
Published in
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, April 2018
DOI 10.1002/jeab.326
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Traditionally, behavior analysts have studied stimulus equivalence using a matching-to-sample (MTS) preparation. Although researchers have shown the utility of MTS to yield equivalence classes, the procedure requires several prerequisite skills for a learner to accurately respond. Previous research with humans and nonhumans has shown that relational responding can be produced via compound stimulus discrimination and successive matching-to-sample (S-MTS). We conducted four experiments with college students to further evaluate the effectiveness of S-MTS in the establishment of stimulus relations. S-MTS trials consisted of the presentation of a single sample stimulus followed by one comparison in a fixed location on a computer screen. Depending upon the sample-comparison relation, participants touched (i.e., go) or did not touch (i.e., no-go) the comparison stimulus. Following training of the baseline relations (AB/BC), we assessed the emergence of symmetry, transitivity, and equivalence performances (i.e., BA/CB and AC/CA). Results support the utility of the S-MTS procedure as a possible alternative to traditional MTS. This study has direct implications for participants for whom traditional three-array MTS procedures may be challenging.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 24%
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 6 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 7 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 October 2023.
All research outputs
#15,304,833
of 26,813,120 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
#417
of 885 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,856
of 345,243 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
#5
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,813,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 885 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,243 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.