Assessing a Derived Transformation of Functions Using the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure Under Three Motivative Conditions

Author(s)

Gomes, Caina T. ^[1] ; Perez, William F. ^{[2, 1]} ; de Almeida, Joao Henrique ^[3] ; Ribeiro, Arthur ^[1] ; de Rose, Julio C. ^{[3, 2]} ; Barnes-Holmes, Dermot ^[4]

Affiliation

^[1] Paradigma Ctr Ciencias & Tecnol Comportamento, Rua Wanderley 611, BR-05011001 Sao Paulo, SP - Brazil

^[2] Inst Nacl Ciencia & Tecnol Comportamento Cognicao, Sao Carlos, SP - Brazil

^[3] Univ Fed Sao Carlos, Sao Carlos, SP - Brazil

^[4] Univ Ghent, Ghent - Belgium

• Document type: Journal article
• Source: PSYCHOLOGICAL RECORD; v. 69, n. 4, p. 487-497, DEC 2019.
• Web of Science Citations: 1

Abstract

In exploring the extent to which the Implicit Relational Assessment procedure (IRAP) may function as a measure of the derived transformation of functions, it is important to determine if it is also sensitive to particular moderating variables. This was the purpose of the current study, which focused on manipulating three different motivating conditions related to stimuli presented during the IRAP task. First, two equivalence classes were established: A1-B1-C1-D1 and A2-B2-C2-D2. These classes comprised nonsense forms (B, C, and D) and two meaningful stimuli: a picture of a glass full of water (A1) and a neutral picture (A2). Derived transformation of function from the meaningful stimuli to two nonsense forms (D1 and D2) was then assessed by means of a semantic differential and an IRAP. Before assessment, participants were divided in three groups: the first had water intake; the second had pepper; the third had pepper before the semantic differential, followed by an extra dose before the IRAP testing blocks. Results suggest that the motivative conditions progressively affected both measures. Regarding the semantic differential, D1 (water) and D2 (neutral) stimuli were close to neutrality for the Water group; for the Pepper and Double Pepper groups, however, the D1 (water) stimulus had a positive valence whereas D2 (neutral) was neutral. In the IRAP, both the Water and Pepper group evaluated D1 as positive; nonetheless, for the Double Pepper group, IRAP scores revealed that D1 was even more positive compared to the other groups. Implications for the IRAP are discussed in terms of the DAARRE model. (AU)

• FAPESP's process: 08/57705-8 - Institute for the Study of Behavior, Cognition and Teaching
• Grantee: Deisy das Graças de Souza
• Support Opportunities: Research Projects - Thematic Grants
• FAPESP's process: 16/05935-6 - Transfer of function through equivalence classes involving facial expressions of happiness and fear
• Grantee: William Ferreira Perez
• Support Opportunities: Regular Research Grants
• FAPESP's process: 17/10037-0 - Transformation of emotional functions in comparison networks evaluated by semantic priming and event-related potentials ERP
• Grantee: João Henrique de Almeida
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships abroad - Research Internship - Post-doctor