El plan experimental de un nuevo plan de estudios para las Enseñanzas Medias pretende trascender la separación existente entre estudios de BUP y de Formación Profesional. La segunda intención de la reforma de las Enseñanzas Medias radica en la persecución de una serie de objetivos de naturaleza no estrictamente académica. Así, en 1984, el CIDE evalúa los resultados de la segunda generación de alumnos que accede a la reforma de las Enseñanzas Medias, además de proceder a la evaluación y seguimiento de la promoción posterior. El objetivo es comparar los resultados y determinar si son mejores, iguales o peores. Se comentan los resultados obtenidos por los alumnos de la segunda generación una vez finalizado el primer ciclo de Enseñanzas Medias.Ministerio Educación CIDEBiblioteca de Educación del Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte; Calle San Agustín, 5 - 3 Planta; 28014 Madrid; Tel. +34917748000; biblioteca@mecd.esES

Álvaro Page, Mariano

Calleja Sopeña, José Ángel

Echevarría Cubillas, María José

Marcos Pérez, Susana

Navas Ara, María José

Peleteiro Ramos, Isabel

Mínguez Ceballos, Ana L.

The current thesis investigated the methodological and clinical implications of rulefollowing
behaviour. The research program comprised eight experimental studies,
including the match-to-sample methodology and the use of radiant heat apparatus. Chapter
1 provides a review of the available literature on rule-following, including empirical
evidence of its clinical implications. Chapter 2 incorporated four studies that examined
rule-following vs. contingency adaptation in a simple automated match-to-sample task
based on previous research (McAuliffe, 2004). In Experiment 1 (n=16), three Pliance
conditions (with differing levels of Experimenter involvement) were compared to a
Tracking condition. In simple terms, the two types of condition were distinguished in terms
of the Experimenter’s knowledge of the experimental rules with which participants had
been provided. Although the results demonstrated a clear distinction between pliance and
tracking, the experimental control of either was not as expected. Specifically, participants
in Pliance showed evidence of tracking, with strong adaptation to changing experimental
contingencies. In contrast, participants in Tracking showed evidence of pliance, with
perseverative rule-following even when the rules became inconsistent with the task
contingencies. In the former conditions, the activities of the Experimenter appeared to have
little influence over responding.
Experiment 2 (n=24) incorporated minor modifications to experimental instructions
based on participant feedback, as well as a greater sample size, to establish more reliable
experimental control over pliance and tracking. The results showed evidence of pliance in
both Tracking and Pliance conditions, thus raising further issues about experimental

control. To address these issues, Experiment 3 (n=16) replicated McAuliffe’s original
procedure without modification, paying particular attention to the original instructions and
with the removal of the instructions after participants had read them. The results recorded
here provided the clearest distinction between pliance and tracking (participants in
Tracking demonstrated tracking and Pliance demonstrated pliance), but were more like
outcomes McAuliffe had reported with depressed, rather than non-depressed, participants.
Experiment 4 (n=16) replicated Experiment 3, but participants retained the instructions
after they had read them. This variable appeared to have had some influence over the
previous outcomes when the data indicated a reduction in the distinction between pliance
and tracking, with participants in Tracking showing increasing pliance and participants in
Pliance showing increasing tracking.
Chapter 3 incorporated two studies that compared pliance and tracking in the
context of different rules (tolerance vs. subjectivity) for coping with experimentallyinduced
pain. Experiment 5 (n=40) attempted to replicate previous research by Hayes and
Wolf (1984), but replaced the cold pressor task with the radiant heat apparatus. Inconsistent
with previous evidence, four of the five conditions recorded decreases in heat tolerance,
with the exception of the Pliance/Subjectivity condition. Experiment 6 (n=40) replicated
Experiment 5, but with the Experimenter absent during the heat tests. The results indicated
a notable distinction between pliance and tracking, in which pliance was associated with
tolerance increases and tracking was associated with tolerance decreases.
Chapter 4 incorporated two studies that compared brief therapeutic acceptancebased
interventions vs. rules to determine which would exert greater influence on heat
tolerance. Experiment 7 (n=32) systematically compared acceptance-based vs. placebo
based interventions and rules. Although the results were partly consistent with predictions
when both Placebo conditions were associated with tolerance decreases, the outcomes for
Acceptance were not as expected. Specifically, the Acceptance Intervention resulted in
marginal tolerance decreases, while the Acceptance Rule produced only marginal tolerance
increases. The final study, Experiment 8 (n=32), compared acceptance interventions and
rules in pliance vs. tracking contexts to determine what impact this variable may have
exerted on the previous findings. The results from Experiment 8 indicated that pliance was
associated with greater tolerance increases than tracking and the intervention overall
produced better tolerance than the rule. The current research raised a number of
methodological and conceptual issues that contribute to the existing literature on rulefollowing
behaviour and these are discussed in the final General Discussion Chapter 5

Gorham, Marie

Irish Universities

Experimental Analyses of Rule-Following:
Methodological and Clinical Implications

The current thesis investigated the methodological and clinical implications of rulefollowing

behaviour. The research program comprised eight experimental studies,

including the match-to-sample methodology and the use of radiant heat apparatus. Chapter

1 provides a review of the available literature on rule-following, including empirical

evidence of its clinical implications. Chapter 2 incorporated four studies that examined

rule-following vs. contingency adaptation in a simple automated match-to-sample task

based on previous research (McAuliffe, 2004). In Experiment 1 (n=16), three Pliance

conditions (with differing levels of Experimenter involvement) were compared to a

Tracking condition. In simple terms, the two types of condition were distinguished in terms

of the Experimenter’s knowledge of the experimental rules with which participants had

been provided. Although the results demonstrated a clear distinction between pliance and

tracking, the experimental control of either was not as expected. Specifically, participants

in Pliance showed evidence of tracking, with strong adaptation to changing experimental

contingencies. In contrast, participants in Tracking showed evidence of pliance, with

perseverative rule-following even when the rules became inconsistent with the task

contingencies. In the former conditions, the activities of the Experimenter appeared to have

little influence over responding.

Experiment 2 (n=24) incorporated minor modifications to experimental instructions

based on participant feedback, as well as a greater sample size, to establish more reliable

experimental control over pliance and tracking. The results showed evidence of pliance in

both Tracking and Pliance conditions, thus raising further issues about experimental



control. To address these issues, Experiment 3 (n=16) replicated McAuliffe’s original

procedure without modification, paying particular attention to the original instructions and

with the removal of the instructions after participants had read them. The results recorded

here provided the clearest distinction between pliance and tracking (participants in

Tracking demonstrated tracking and Pliance demonstrated pliance), but were more like

outcomes McAuliffe had reported with depressed, rather than non-depressed, participants.

Experiment 4 (n=16) replicated Experiment 3, but participants retained the instructions

after they had read them. This variable appeared to have had some influence over the

previous outcomes when the data indicated a reduction in the distinction between pliance

and tracking, with participants in Tracking showing increasing pliance and participants in

Pliance showing increasing tracking.

Chapter 3 incorporated two studies that compared pliance and tracking in the

context of different rules (tolerance vs. subjectivity) for coping with experimentallyinduced

pain. Experiment 5 (n=40) attempted to replicate previous research by Hayes and

Wolf (1984), but replaced the cold pressor task with the radiant heat apparatus. Inconsistent

with previous evidence, four of the five conditions recorded decreases in heat tolerance,

with the exception of the Pliance/Subjectivity condition. Experiment 6 (n=40) replicated

Experiment 5, but with the Experimenter absent during the heat tests. The results indicated

a notable distinction between pliance and tracking, in which pliance was associated with

tolerance increases and tracking was associated with tolerance decreases.

Chapter 4 incorporated two studies that compared brief therapeutic acceptancebased

interventions vs. rules to determine which would exert greater influence on heat

tolerance. Experiment 7 (n=32) systematically compared acceptance-based vs. placebo

based interventions and rules. Although the results were partly consistent with predictions

when both Placebo conditions were associated with tolerance decreases, the outcomes for

Acceptance were not as expected. Specifically, the Acceptance Intervention resulted in

marginal tolerance decreases, while the Acceptance Rule produced only marginal tolerance

increases. The final study, Experiment 8 (n=32), compared acceptance interventions and

rules in pliance vs. tracking contexts to determine what impact this variable may have

exerted on the previous findings. The results from Experiment 8 indicated that pliance was

associated with greater tolerance increases than tracking and the intervention overall

produced better tolerance than the rule. The current research raised a number of

methodological and conceptual issues that contribute to the existing literature on rulefollowing

behaviour and these are discussed in the final General Discussion Chapter 5

Maynooth University ePrints and eTheses Archive

Experimental Analyses of Rule-Following:

Methodological and Clinical Implications

Revista de educación

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Irish Universities

Maynooth University ePrints and eTheses Archive

NUI Maynooth Eprint Archive

MURAL - Maynooth University Research Archive Library