RFT Bridges Waves with Pragmatism as Supports

1. RFT Bridges Waves with Pragmatism as Supports Hank Robb, PH.D., ABPP

2. Acknowledgments • The ACT/ RFT community was very supportive and helpful to this presentation. • Special acknowledgement to D.J. Moran, Ph.D.

3. Definition: • “Relational Frame Theory is a comprehensive functional contextual program of basic behavioral research on human language and cognition” • (Hayes, Strosahl, Bunting, Twohig, Wilson, 2004, p. 21)

4. What does this functional contextual behavioral research add to what we know about language and cognition?

5. RFT brings to light an analysis of a generalized operant behavior that is rarely analyzed: RELATING! Also called Relational Responding

6. What is Relating?(Relational Responding) • Responding in accordance to the properties of two or more stimuli • Conditioned discrimination • Derived relational responding

7. Conditioned Discrimination = Pick taller = Pick shorter

8. A B Extinction Schedule

9. $$ Food A B Reinforcement Schedule

10. $$ Food A B Reinforcement Schedule

11. $$ After counterbalanced, multiple exemplar trainings, the subject reliably selects the object that is physically taller. This is a nonarbitrary relation. Food A B Reinforcement Schedule

12. Arbitrary: Based on or determined by individual preference or convenience rather than by necessity or the intrinsic nature of something Nonarbitrary: NOT based on or determined by individual preference or convenience but rather by “necessity” or the “intrinsic” nature of something

13. Think about what happens in discrimination… • Think about what a “discrimnator” is…

14. = Pick shorter A B Extinction Schedule

15. $$ Food A B Reinforcement Schedule

16. $$ Food A B Reinforcement Schedule

17. $$ AGAIN - After counterbalanced, multiple exemplar trainings, the subject reliably selects the object that is physically shorter. This is a nonarbitrary relation. Food A B Reinforcement Schedule

18. Nonverbal organisms are capable of this kind of relating… …because the relating is based on physical nonarbitrary properties A B

19. Nonverbal organisms are capable of this kind of relating… A monkey can do this! …because the relating is based on physical nonarbitrary properties A B

20. A B

21. That’s called derived relating, baby!

22. …and it’s simpler than you think • In this demonstration, the boy is taught that A=B, and derives that B=A • This type of deriving is only available in this sense to verbally adroit human beings, and it is called: Derived Relational Responding

23. Derived Relational Responding • “Derive” means to obtain or draw from • When the boy is taught A=B, he has a history of also being reinforced for B=A relationships. • Infra-human subjects do not demonstrate this.

24. A few examples of Derived Relational Responding

25. CUG

26. CUG WOL YAB VEK Extinction Schedule

27. CUG $$ YAB VEK WOL Reinforcement Schedule

28. CUG $$ VEK WOL YAB Reinforcement Schedule

29. CUG DAX NAL ZET Extinction Schedule

30. CUG DAX NAL ZET Extinction Schedule

31. CUG $$ DAX NAL ZET Reinforcement Schedule

32. CUG $$ ZET NAL DAX Reinforcement Schedule

33. CUG $$ DAX ZET NAL Reinforcement Schedule

34. What was demonstrated? CUG Trained Trained ZET VEK So far, it’s just conditioned discrimination

35. SD : R  S R+ present CUG select VEK reinforced with money : 

36. Here’s where things get funky. ZET CUG LIF RAL

37. VEK LIF CUG RAL

38. What was demonstrated? CUG Trained Trained Derived Derived ZET VEK Barnes-Holmes, Hayes, Dymond, O’Hora, 2001

39. What was demonstrated? CUG Trained Trained Derived Derived ZET VEK In the absence of previous reinforcement, a new response is demonstrated. Mutual entailment – Bidirectional relating: If A is related to B, B is related to A

40. ZET VEK LIF RAL

41. ZET LIF VEK RAL

42. VEK LIF RAL ZET

43. VEK ZET LIF RAL

44. What was demonstrated? CUG Trained Trained Derived Derived ZET Derived VEK Derived Barnes-Holmes, Hayes, Dymond, O’Hora, 2001

45. What was demonstrated? CUG Trained Trained Derived Derived ZET Derived VEK Derived In the absence of previous reinforcement, another new response is demonstrated. Combinatorial entailment: If A is related to B, and B is related to C, then A is related to C

46. What was demonstrated? Just for fun… notice how these relations are ARBITRARY CUG Trained Trained Derived Derived ZET Derived VEK Derived In the absence of previous reinforcement, another new response is demonstrated. Combinatorial entailment: If A is related to B, and B is related to C, then A is related to C

47. Derived Relational Responding • We trained 2 stimulus relations • The subject derived 4 more

48. What was demonstrated? CUG SAME SAME SAME SAME ZET SAME VEK SAME In the absence of previous reinforcement, another new response is demonstrated. Combinatorial entailment: If A is related to B, and B is related to C, then A is related to C

49. Basic Principles in RFT • Mutual entailment • If A=B, then B=A • Combinatorial entailment • If A=B and B=C, then A=C • Transformation of Stimulus Functions • Environmental events will have an altered effect on behavior due to the environmental events’ participation in relations with other stimulus events

50. Transformation of Stimulus Functions VEK RAL ZET Punishment Schedule Same research participant in the last training