RFT – Flashcard

A class of responses (group or category of behaviors) that have same effect in given context

The context and effect of the responses - NOT THE FORM (physical properties) of the response. (GETTING SOMEONE TO LEAVE BY SCREAMING OR FARTING - effect same not form).

An operant which has not been directly reinforced. (Animals also display generalized operants by language leads people to form and relate based on generalized operants).

Types of relational responding that become generalized operants through MULTIPLE EXEMPLAR TRAINING.

Responding to one stimulus based on its relation to another stimulus

Humans can respond to relations among stimuli even when those relations are not based on physical properties (arbitrary relations)

In the environment let you know that specific type of relational responding will be reinforced, and certain features of context (e.g. is bigger than), become associated with certain types of relational responding as they predict reinforcement for making type of relational response.

1. Mutual Entailment 2. Combinatorial Entailment 3. Transformation of Stimulus

Psychological event of responding under contextual control. It can be considered an operant (verbal behavior)

Coordination, distinction, opposition (opposite, same), comparison (faster, slower), special, hierarchical, temporal (before/after), causality, deictic (perspective here/there)

A relation between 2 or more stimuli that is not directly trained or taught, and is NOT based solely on physical properties of stimuli.

Operant & classical learning, which we can use to derive an infinite number of relations between words, events, and meanings.

Symbolism and generatively of language

That derived stimulus relations are possible b/c types of relational responding become generalized operants. RFT is a contextual account of how humans learn to derive stimulus relations. Deriving relations among events is core of human language and cognition.

Conditioned DiscriminatIion: based on NONARBITRARY FEATURES of stimuli (physical properties) Derived Relational: ARBITRARY features of stimuli. - Animals can only learn arbitrary if they are directly reinforced (sit), humans can DERIVE relations (get the other one)

- Mutual entailment - Combinatorial Entailment - transformation of stimulus (polly want a cracker is not verbal behavior. Just behavior of making sound)

BIDIRECTIONAL nature of stimulus relations - A relation in one direction entails or implies a relation in other direction. (A to B = B to A) In arbitrarily applicable relational responding, the type of relation is specified by contextual cues.

Stimuli relations can be determined by combining other stimulus relations. (If A is bigger than B, and B is bigger than C, then A is bigger than C. If the relationships between A and B, and B and C are trained, the deriving stimulus relations between A and C.)

- How psychological functions of stimulus are transformed on how it is related to other stimuli. - Any stimulus or event has multiple psychological functions which vary depending on setting & person's history of interacting with stimulus. - Psychological functions of stimulus can change based on relation to other stimuli & not on physical properties of stimuli (when Pavlov conditioned dog to associate bell w/ food, bell took on psychological fx of food). - For humans, this can be based on arbitrary relations rather than being directly conditioned..

Many aspects of early language training resemble multiple exemplar training for relational responding. (Every time kid recognizes "dog" the child is praised, so the kid learns that "dog" refers to a dog.)

- Arbitrarily applicable relational responses: are relational responses not based on the physical properties of stimuli being related. Relational frames are arbitrarily applicable b/c they are contextually controlled (they are controlled by features of the context rather than physical properties of the stimuli being related) - Many contextual cues are written or spoken words or phrases, like "A is the same as B," which specify the relations between stimuli. (Other contextual cues might be the speaker's tone of voice, form or structures of sentences, pointing at something, etc). - Any feature of the event and environment can serve as a contextual cue for relational responding. - Although relational frames are arbitrarily applicable they are not necessarily always arbitrarily applied. "Dad" arbitrarily stands for a guy that has a kid, and, initially, "Dad" is arbitrarily applicable. It's arbitrarily applicable because the guy with a kid could have been called anything ("papa," "father," etc). But, it's not arbitrarily applied because Dad always means a guy with a kid, and it's been reinforced specifically.

Nonarbitrary differences between stimuli can actually be noticed. (brighter, taller, higher...) As humans learn to arbitrarily apply relational responses, even the non-arbitrary or physical features of our environment acquire new functions through their participation on relational frames. You can train a dog to get the "bigger" ball (nonarbitrary), but not the "other" ball (arbitrary).

1) Multiple opportunities to make a response in a context and experience the consequences. 2) Conditions of obtaining reinforcement (the kind of response required to achieve the same effect) remain the same. 3) Features that are irrelevant to what is being enforced may vary across opportunities. (ex. To train: "Big, bigger, biggest," show pictures of different things and reinforce responding to "big, bigger, biggest" relationship while ignoring the different shapes.) Multiple exemplar training establishes types of relational responding as generalized operants, and this gives rise to the ability to derive stimulus relations. Multiple exemplar training on relational responding could be considered the cause of derived stimulus relations, relational frames, and the symbolism and generativity of language.

Crel, Cfunc

A type of contextual cue that facilitates mutual entailment and combinatorial entailment between stimuli, or the type of relational response that is likely to be reinforced. (the verb clause; is more than, )

A type of contextual cue that specifies psychologically relevant functions to be transformed. (ex Tastes, smells, feels like, dangerous, desirable.

Through the process of multiple exemplar training (according to Radical behaviorists). (I-here, You-there, etc)

Any behavior that has been directly shaped by the environment (shaped through direct contact with environmental consequences).

Behavior based on verbal behavior about the environment which takes the form of rules for navigating the environment. One can naturally come to the conclusions through contingency shaped behavior, but if you behave a certain way not because you have learned through actions but decided to follow the rule, it is rule governed behavior. Ex. If you don't touch the stove because you have learned this rule rather than because you once touched a stove and got burned. (note: Rules require relational framing).

Tracking: When the rule-governed behavior leads to successful natural outcomes (like directions). Ex. "Press your foot on the break to stop the car." " Pliance: When rule-governed behavior is under the control of the socially mediated consequences (i.e. Pleasing the social world). Ex. You don't do something because someone will be mad at you; when your mom says "clean your room" and you do it to avoid the "or else" Augmental: Rule-governed behavior that changes the capacity of events to function as reinforcers or punishment. Example: Wouldn't an ice-cold Pepsi go good right now?, "ice-cold" augments "Pepsi."

According to RFT, rules are effective for humans because they provide cues for responding relationally to events in our environment. Through participation in relational frames, the psychological functions of these events are changed. For instance, "If you feed my pet pig while I am on vacation for the next week, I will give you $50 when I get back" might influence your behavior, because feeding the pig now predicts reinforcement later, and you can access this reinforcement (in this case, $50) without having been directly conditioned.

1. Dominance of verbal relations removes people from responding to their environment. Bidirectional transformation of stimulus functions means that mutually entailed equivalence relations between words and referents (the words or thoughts we use to name or describe stimuli and events) often share stimulus functions of events. For instance, seeing a snake and hearing "Snake!" might be the same for some people (who they suffer not only when they see a snake, but every time they head "snake"). When a word refers to stimuli that are painful or aversive, those words themselves may become painful or aversive. Their functions will be transformed according to their relation equivalence to actual stimuli or events. When you think of a dead loved one, or your failures, you "carry" the pain of the event. 2. We work not only to avoid or escape unpleasant events, but also avoid painful or aversive thoughts, feelings, emotions or private experiences. Unfortunately, research shows that trying to suppress a thought typically makes the thought occur more frequently, not less. The attempt to avoid thoughts and private experiences may be the root of many psychological disorders. Also, We avoid things that are dangerous (great), but then, via RFT, avoiding becomes associated with dangerousness and the act of avoiding defines the thing as dangerous. You feel anxious when you see something dangerous, then anxiety becomes mutually entailed with dangerousness, then you try to avoid anxiety, then anxiety itself is something to become anxious about. 3. Rampant rule following. Rules help you behave effectively even when the consequences of our behavior are small, cumulative, probabilistic, or greatly delayed (getting a college degree), and can help us avoid dangerous or lethal consequences (getting burned from touching a hot stove). Unfortunately, rules also make us less sensitive or unaware of changes in the environment not contacted or described by the rules we are following. Humans will often continue to follow a rule even if the rule is inaccurate, ineffective or harmful. Rules can introduce behavioral rigidity. From the perspective of RFT, learning to identify and follow rules that accurately describe the consequences of behavior and lead to desired outcomes is key to psychological health and psychological flexibility.

Mutual and combinatorial entailment are regulated by contextual cues that tell the type of relational response that is likely to be reinforced—this is the Crel . The Crel is words like more, less, same, before, after, etc. Transformation of stimulus functions are regulated by additional contextual cues—Cfunc. Cfunc is a contextual cue that establishes which psychological functions should be transformed in a particular situation (could have to do with direct experiences, memories, smell, taste, touch...what features matter in verbal relation etc.)

A collection of stimuli that are related together in some way. It could be anything—paragraphs, poems, trilogies, biographies, sonnets, comic strip, mathematical proofs, riddle, arguments. RFT provides a functional, technical account of how networks are learned and determined by context.

A complete relational network is when there are cues (Crels) that set the occasion for relational activity necessary to specify a relation between all the stimuli or events in the relational network. Ex. "That man is a chef" is a complete relational network. It provides cues (Crels) that evoke a relational response (equivalence or hierarchy) between all the stimuli or events in the network ("that man" and "chef). "That man is a" or "That man chef"(missing Crels) is an incomplete relational network.

Sets of relations can be related. Relating relations is the basis of metaphors, analogies, anecdotes, parables, allegories and the like. Ex. "electron is to nucleus as planet is to sun...the equivalence is between two relations. The relations are not completely arbitrary. The two events share some common properties that make the metaphor useful. Their relationship is the Crel, and way that they are similar is the Cfunc.

Instead of doing trial and error, verbally analyzing and deriving relations (pragmatic verbal analysis) seems to be the basis of problem solving. Toothbrush, screw and lighter example: How can you undo a screw if you only have a lighter and toothbrush? Toothbrushes are made of plastic and cand be melted. It's pliable and can be reshaped and hardened to unscrew the screw.) By deriving networks of relations among these objects and their physical properties, the functions of the objects are transformed in a manner that allows the goal (turning the screw) to be achieved.

ACT therapists discourage "making sense" or providing reasons or rationale for behavior. ACT therapists try to help clients take language less literally. They emphasize the arbitrary nature of the relation between words and referents. ACT strategies help people limit their rule-following to contexts that benefit from it. Paradox, metaphor, experiential exercises are used a lot in ACT to deliteralize language, and form new relational networks.

When something is bigger, brighter, taster, prettier, or softer than something else we can make a relational responses. Relational responding can be based solely on the physical properties of the related stimuli. Arbitrarily applicable relational responding is based on the contextual cues other than just the physical properties of the related stimuli. Humans can respond to relations among stimuli even when relations are not based on physical properties of the stimuli. (Humans can respond to arbitrary relations among stimuli...arbitrary relations are based on social whim or convention.)

If human language and derived stimulus relations overlap at the level of behavioral process, then questions about human language may also be questions about derived stimulus relations, and vice versa. Therefore, examining stimulus equivalence, naming, understanding, analogy, metaphor, and rule-following helps us understand RFT. While there is a empirical conceptual relationship between derived stimulus relations and language, derived stimulus relations do not depend on or mediate language. RFT sees these as correlated and related to basic underlying psychological processes.