The evidence for naming as a cause or facilitator of equivalence class formation

Article Abstract:

The arguments of Horne and Lowe in their paper on naming are characterized by certain interpretative and logical difficulties. The data that they used do not adequately demonstrate that classes emerge when there is naming and that classes do not occur when there is no naming. Actually, their data merely reveal that class formation fails to occur when there is naming and that classes emerge if naming is not present. However, these do not support the naming hypothesis.

---

Natural contingencies in the creation of naming as a higher order behavior class

Article Abstract:

Horne and Lowe's paper on naming fails to adequately illuminate on the contingencies that influence the classes created by naming, and the status of covert behavior. There are two possible explanations for this limitation. One is that the human capacity to develop higher order behavior classes is not the same as that of other species. Another is that humans have unique differential sensitivity to properties of their own covert behavior.

---

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Naming is not (necessary for) stimulus equivalence. Experimental analysis of naming behavior cannot explain naming capacity
• Abstracts: On naming and symbolic behavior: in the beginning was the name?
• Abstracts: Naming, meaning, and verbal operants. Names as constituents of sentences: an omission

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.