Review of Gambling: Behavior Theory, Research, and Application By Patrick M. Gheezi, Charles a. Lyons, Mark R. Dixon, and Ginger R. Wilson (Eds.)

Behavior analysis has not devoted much research attention to understanding or treating gambling behavior, yet it clearly has much to offer. Recently, the advent of this journal and other developments has helped to increase the need for, and relevance of, behavior analytic approaches to the study of gambling behavior. The edited volume by Ghezzi, Lyons, Dixon, and Wilson (2006) is testimony to this growing interest. In an effort to further delineate the behavior analysis of gambling behavior, Ghezzi and colleagues have produced a compelling and timely scholarly overview of behavioral research on understanding and treating disorders associated with gambling. The book should serve to stimulate contin-ued research interest in gambling behavior from within the behavioral communi-ty

Emergent Stimulus Relations Depend on Stimulus Correlation and Not on Reinforcement Contingencies

We aimed to investigate whether novel stimulus relations would emerge from stimulus correlations when those relations explicitly conflicted with reinforced relations. In a symbolic matching-to-sample task using kanji characters as stimuli, we arranged class-specific incorrect comparison stimuli in each of three classes. After presenting either Ax or Cx stimuli as samples, choices of Bx were reinforced and choices of Gx or Hx were not. Tests for symmetry, and combined symmetry and transitivity, showed the emergence of three 3-member (AxBxCx) stimulus classes in 5 of 5 human participants. Subsequent tests for all possible emergent relations between Ax, Bx, Cx and the class-specific incorrect comparisons Gx and Hx showed that these relations emerged for 4 of 5 the participants after extended overtraining of the baseline relations. These emergent relations must have been based on stimulus–stimulus correlations, and were not properties of the trained discriminated operants, because they required control by relations explicitly extinguished during training. This result supports theoretical accounts of emergent relations that emphasize stimulus correlation over operant contingencies

Stimulus Equivalence: Testing Sidman's (2000) Theory

Sidman's (2000) theory regarding the origin of equivalence relations predicts that a reinforcing stimulus common to distinct equivalence classes must drop out of the equivalence relations. This prediction was tested in the present study by arranging class-specific reinforcers, R1 and R2, following correct responding on the prerequisite conditional discriminations (Ax–Bx, Cx–Bx) for two stimulus classes, A1B1C1 and A2B2C2. A class-common reinforcer, R3, was presented following correct responding on the prerequisite conditional discriminations for a further two stimulus classes, A3B3C3 and A4B4C4. Sidman's theory predicts reinforcer inclusion within Classes 1 and 2 only, given this training arrangement. Experiment 1 tested for the emergence of four equivalence classes and of stimulus–reinforcer and reinforcer–stimulus relations in each class. Four of the 6 subjects demonstrated the reinforcer-based relations in all four equivalence classes, rather than in only those classes with a class-specific reinforcer, as Sidman's theory predicts. One of the remaining 2 subjects showed the reinforcer-based relations in three of the four classes. Experiment 2 extended these findings to document the emergence of interclass matching relations based on the common reinforcer R3, in 5 of 6 subjects, such that a Class 3 sample occasioned the selection of a Class 4 sample when the Class 3 comparison was absent, and similarly, a Class 4 sample occasioned the selection of a Class 3 comparison when the Class 4 comparison was absent. These interclass relations emerged despite the simultaneous maintenance of Class 3 and 4 baseline conditional discriminations, so that the Class 3 and 4 stimuli and reinforcer simultaneously were, and were not, part of a single larger equivalence class. These data are irreconcilable with Sidman's theory, and question the utility of the application of the equivalence relation in describing derived stimulus relations