Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Relational Coherence, Speaker Preference, and Rule-Following: A Replication and Extension of Bianchi et al. (2021)

  • Paulo Henrique Bianchi
  • , William Ferreira Perez
  • , Colin Harte
  • , Dermot Barnes-Holmes
  • , Antonio Teixeira E Silva

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The present study evaluated the influence of relational coherence upon speaker preference and subsequent rule-following behavior. Across two experiments, participants first learned a particular set of conditional relations via a stimulus-pairing procedure (e.g., A1B1, A2B2). Then, the same relations were presented in an MTS task to ensure that participants could correctly match these stimuli. Next, the participants were exposed to two animated characters or speakers that differed by the color of their t-shirt (green or purple). One of the speakers “stated” relations that cohered (e.g., A1B1, A2B2) with the participant’s previous relational training and the other stated relations that were incoherent (e.g., A1B2, A2B1). The stimulus relations were presented inside a speech balloon, as if each speaker spoke them. Rule-following was assessed during a subsequent preference test in which partici-pants were exposed to a simultaneous discrimination task with novel stimuli. On each trial, participants first chose which of the two speakers to provide an instruction to tell them how to respond on that trial. Both speakers presented rules that were consistent with the pro-gramed contingency. In Experiment 1, feedback during the rule-following task was deliv-ered in CRF; In Experiment 2, the schedule was FR10. In both experiments and IRAP was implemented to assess the credibility of each speaker. Results showed that a history of rela-tional coherence with each speaker had a reliable impact upon the preference test, rule-following behaviors and the IRAP performance, irrespective of the reinforcement schedule in place (CRF in Experiment 1 and FR10 in Experiment 2).
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)41–55
Number of pages15
JournalThe Psychological Record
Volume75
Early online date22 Jan 2025
DOIs
Publication statusPublished (in print/issue) - 31 Mar 2025

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© Association for Behavior Analysis International 2025.

Data Availability Statement

All data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article and its tables. Any additional data can be obtained by directly contacting the corresponding author.

Funding

The present research was supported by the S\u00E3o Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP; Grant numbers 2019/24210-0, 2017/10037-0, 2016/05935-6, and 2008/57705-8) and by the Brazilian National Research Council (CNPq, Grant numbers 573972/2008-7 and 465686/2014-1); the present study is also part of the research program of the Instituto Nacional de Ci\u00EAncia e Tecnologia sobre Comportamento, Cogni\u00E7\u00E3o e Ensino (INCT-ECCE).

Funder number
2016/05935-6, 2008/57705-8, 2019/24210-0, 2017/10037-0
465686/2014-1, 573972/2008-7

    UN SDGs

    This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

    1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
      SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

    Keywords

    • relational frame theory
    • HDML
    • Coherence
    • Rule following
    • Preference test
    • Adults
    • Relational frame theory
    • Rule-following

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Relational Coherence, Speaker Preference, and Rule-Following: A Replication and Extension of Bianchi et al. (2021)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this