Exploring Differential Trial-Type Effects and the Impact of a Read-Aloud Procedure on Deictic Relational Responding on the IRAP
- 16 Downloads
Under the rubric of Relational Frame Theory (RFT), researchers have investigated the role of deictic relational responding in the analysis of self in relation to others, place, and time, primarily through the use of an extended developmental protocol (Barnes-Holmes, 2001). In a move toward extending methodologies for studying deictic relational responding, more recent research has employed the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) to measure deictic relational responding regarding I versus OTHER (Barbero-Rubio et al. in The Psychological Record, 66, 243–252, 2016). The initial purpose of the current study was to systematically replicate and extend this research. This extension involved the inclusion of a control condition in which no responding to self was involved, only responding to others. The results from Experiment 1 yielded significant IRAP effects for two of the four trial-types in both the deictic and control IRAPs. A second experiment involved a novel method for collecting IRAP data (a read-aloud procedure), which had been shown to yield significant effects for all four trial-types, and four significant effects were indeed recorded for both deictic and control IRAPs. Based on the current findings, a model is presented that seeks to explain the differential trial-type effects that are observed across the different IRAPs and the impact of the read-aloud procedure.
KeywordsRelational frame theory IRAP Deictic DAARRE model
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures in the current study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee, and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants.
- Barnes-Holmes, Y. (2001). Analysing relational frames: Studying language and cognition in young children (unpublished doctoral thesis). National University of Ireland Maynooth.Google Scholar
- Barnes-Holmes, D., Finn, M., McEnteggart, C., & Barnes-Holmes, Y. (2017). Derived stimulus relations and their roles in a behavior-analytic account of human language and cognition. The Behavior Analyst. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-017-0124-7.
- Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 85.Google Scholar
- Finn, M., Barnes-Holmes, D., Hussey, I., & Graddy, J. (2016). Exploring the behavioral dynamics of the implicit relational assessment procedure: The impact of three types of introductory rules. The Psychological Record, 66, 309–321Google Scholar
- Finn, M., Barnes-Holmes, & McEnteggart, C. (2017). Exploring the single-trial-type-dominance-effect in the IRAP: Developing a differential arbitrarily applicable relational responding effects (DAARRE) model. The Psychological Record. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-017-0262-z.
- Gore, N. G., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Murphy, G. (2010). The relationship between intellectual functioning and relational perspective-taking. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 10, 1–17.Google Scholar
- Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
- Hussey, I., McEnteggart, C., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Kavanagh, D., Barnes-Holmes, D., Parling, T., & Lundgren, T. (2014). Flexible perspective-taking: New concepts and a new behavioural measure. Dublin: ACT CBS Conference.Google Scholar
- Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research: Evaluating experimental in psychology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Villatte, M., Monestés, J.-L., McHugh, L., Freixa i Baqué, E. F. i., & Loas, G. (2008). Assessing deictic relational responding in social anhedonia: A functional approach to the development of theory of mind impairments. Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 4, 360–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar