RELATING DERIVED RELATIONS AS A MODEL OF ANALOGICAL REASONING: REACTION TIMES AND EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS
Corresponding Author
Dermot Barnes-Holmes
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
National University of Ireland, Maynooth
Dermot Barnes-Holmes, at the Department of Psychology, National University of Ireland, Maynooth, Maynooth, Co. Kildare, Ireland (e-mail: [email protected]).Search for more papers by this authorDonal Regan
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
National University of Ireland, Maynooth
Search for more papers by this authorYvonne Barnes-Holmes
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
National University of Ireland, Maynooth
Search for more papers by this authorSean Commins
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
National University of Ireland, Maynooth
Search for more papers by this authorDerek Walsh
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
National University of Ireland, Maynooth
Search for more papers by this authorIan Stewart
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
National University of Ireland, Galway
Search for more papers by this authorPaul M. Smeets
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
Leiden University
Search for more papers by this authorRobert Whelan
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
University College, Dublin
Search for more papers by this authorSimon Dymond
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
University of Wales, Swansea.
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Dermot Barnes-Holmes
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
National University of Ireland, Maynooth
Dermot Barnes-Holmes, at the Department of Psychology, National University of Ireland, Maynooth, Maynooth, Co. Kildare, Ireland (e-mail: [email protected]).Search for more papers by this authorDonal Regan
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
National University of Ireland, Maynooth
Search for more papers by this authorYvonne Barnes-Holmes
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
National University of Ireland, Maynooth
Search for more papers by this authorSean Commins
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
National University of Ireland, Maynooth
Search for more papers by this authorDerek Walsh
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
National University of Ireland, Maynooth
Search for more papers by this authorIan Stewart
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
National University of Ireland, Galway
Search for more papers by this authorPaul M. Smeets
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
Leiden University
Search for more papers by this authorRobert Whelan
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
University College, Dublin
Search for more papers by this authorSimon Dymond
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, MAYNOOTH; NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY; LEIDEN UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN; AND UNIVERSITY OF WALES, SWANSEA
University of Wales, Swansea.
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
The current study aimed to test a Relational Frame Theory (RFT) model of analogical reasoning based on the relating of derived same and derived difference relations. Experiment 1 recorded reaction time measures of similar—similar (e.g., “apple is to orange as dog is to cat”) versus different—different (e.g., “he is to his brother as chalk is to cheese”) derived relational responding, in both speed-contingent and speed-noncontingent conditions. Experiment 2 examined the event-related potentials (ERPs) associated with these two response patterns. Both experiments showed similar—similar responding to be significantly faster than different—different responding. Experiment 2 revealed significant differences between the waveforms of the two response patterns in the left-hemispheric prefrontal regions; different—different waveforms were significantly more negative than similar—similar waveforms. The behavioral and neurophysiological data support the RFT prediction that, all things being equal, similar—similar responding is relationally “simpler” than, and functionally distinct from, different—different analogical responding. The ERP data were fully consistent with findings in the neurocognitive literature on analogy. These findings strengthen the validity of the RFT model of analogical reasoning and supplement the behavior-analytic approach to analogy based on the relating of derived relations.
REFERENCES
- Andreassi, J. L. (2000). Psychophysiology: Human behavior & physiological response ( 4th ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Barnes, D. (1994). Stimulus equivalence and relational frame theory. The Psychological Record, 44, 91–124.
- Barnes, D., Hegarty, N., & Smeets, P. M. (1997). Relating equivalence relations to equivalence relations: A relational framing model of complex human functioning. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 14, 57–83.
- Barnes-Holmes, D., Staunton, C., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Whelan, R., Stewart, I., Commins, S., et al. (2004). Interfacing relational frame theory with cognitive neuroscience: Semantic priming, the implicit association test, and event related potentials. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 4, 215–240.
- Barnes-Holmes, D., Staunton, C., Whelan, R., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Commins, S., Walsh, D., et al. (2005). Derived stimulus relations, semantic priming, and event-related potentials: Testing a behavioral theory of semantic networks. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 84, 417–433.
- Boroojerdi, B., Phipps, M., Kopylev, L., Wharton, C. M., Cohen, L. G., & Grafman, J. (2001). Enhancing analogic reasoning with rTMS over the left prefrontal cortex. Neurology, 56, 526–528.
- Bottini, G., Corcoran, R., Sterzi, R., Paulesu, E., Schenone, P., Scarpa, P., et al. (1994). The role of the right hemisphere in the interpretation of figurative aspects of language: A positron emission tomography activation study. Brain, 117, 1241–1253.
- Carpentier, F., Smeets, P. M., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2002). Matching functionally same relations: Implications for equivalence-equivalence as a model for analogical reasoning. The Psychological Record, 52, 351–370.
- Carpentier, F., Smeets, P. M., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2003). Equivalence-equivalence as a model of analogy: Further analyses. The Psychological Record, 53, 349–371.
- Carpentier, F., Smeets, P. M., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Stewart, I. (2004). Matching derived functionally-same relations: Equivalence-equivalence and classical analogies. The Psychological Record, 54, 255–273.
- Dymond, S., & Barnes, D. (1994). A transfer of self-discrimination response functions through equivalence relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 62, 251–267.
- Dymond, S., & Barnes, D. (1995). A transformation of self-discrimination response functions in accordance with the arbitrarily applicable relations of sameness, more-than, and less-than. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 64, 163–184.
- Dymond, S., & Barnes, D. (1996). A transformation of self-discrimination response functions in accordance with the arbitrarily applicable relations of sameness and opposition. The Psychological Record, 46, 271–300.
- Goel, V., & Dolan, R. J. (2000). Anatomical segregation of component processes in an inductive inference task. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 110–121.
- Goel, V., Gold, B., Kapur, S., & Houle, S. (1998). Neuroanatomical correlates of human reasoning. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 293–302.
- Hayes, S. C. (1991). A relational control theory of stimulus equivalence. In L. J. Hayes & P. N. Chase (Eds.), Dialogues on verbal behavior (pp. 19–40). Reno, NV: Context Press.
-
Hayes, S. C.,
Barnes-Holmes, D., &
Roche, B. (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Plenum.
10.1007/b108413 Google Scholar
- Holcomb, P. J. (1988). Automatic and attentional processing: An event-related brain potential analysis of semantic priming. Brain and Language, 35, 66–85.
- Holth, P., & Arntzen, E. (2000). Reaction times and the emergence of class consistent responding: A case for precurrent responding? The Psychological Record, 50, 305–335.
- Imam, A. A. (2001). Speed contingencies, number of stimulus presentations, and the nodality effect in equivalence class formation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 76, 265–288.
- Kastak, D., & Schusterman, R. J. (1994). Transfer of visual identity matching-to-sample in two California sea lions (Zalophus californianus). Animal Learning & Behavior, 22, 427–435.
- Klein, G. A. (1987). Applications of analogical reasoning. Metaphor and symbolic activity, 2, 201–218.
- Kutas, M. (1993). In the company of other words: Electrophysiological evidence for single-word and sentence context effects. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 533–572.
- Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Nature, 307, 1161–1163.
- Lipkens, G. (1992). Analogical reasoning as arbitrarily applicable relational responding. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Nevada, Reno.
- Luo, Q., Perry, C., Peng, D., Jin, Z., Xu, D., Ding, G., & Xu, S. (2003). The neural substrate of analogical reasoning: An fMRI study. Cognitive Brain Research, 17, 527–534.
- Steele, D., & Hayes, S. C. (1991). Stimulus equivalence and arbitrarily applicable relational responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56, 519–555.
- Stewart, I., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2001). Understanding metaphor: A relational frame perspective. The Behavior Analyst, 24, 191–199.
- Stewart, I., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2004). A modern behavior-analytic approach to analogical reasoning. The Irish Psychologist, 30, 117–124.
- Stewart, I., Barnes-Holmes, D., Hayes, S. C., & Lipkens, R. (2001). Relations among relations: Analogies, metaphors and stories. In S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, & B. Roche (Eds.), Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition (pp. 73–86). New York: Plenum.
- Stewart, I., Barnes-Holmes, D., Roche, B., & Smeets, P. M. (2001). Generating derived relational networks via the abstraction of common physical properties: A possible model of analogical reasoning. The Psychological Record, 51, 381–408.
- Stewart, I., Barnes-Holmes, D., Roche, B., & Smeets, P. M. (2002). A functional-analytic model of analogy: A relational frame analysis. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 78, 275–396.
- Weisbrod, M., Kefer, M., Winkler, S., Maier, S., Hill, H., Roesch-Ely, D., & Spitzer, M. (1999). Electrophysiological correlates of direct versus indirect semantic priming in normal volunteers. Cognitive Brain Research, 8, 289–298.
- Wharton, C. M., Grafman, J., Flitman, S. S., Hansen, E. K., Brauner, J., Marks, A., & Honda, M. (2000). Towards neuroanatomical models of analogy: A positron emission tomography study of analogical mapping. Cognitive Psychology, 40, 173–197.
- Whelan, R., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2004). A derived transformation of consequential functions in accordance with the relational frames of same and opposite. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 82, 177–195.
