Research Data on Maintenance of Equivalence Relations

Published: 1 October 2020| Version 1 | DOI: 10.17632/dj947p9stz.1
Marcelo Silveira,
Julio Camargo,
Natalia Aggio,
Giovan W. Ribeiro,
Mariéle Cortez,
Michael Young,
Julio de Rose


Research data of submitted paper on the maintenance of equivalence classes, including two datasets and the R commands used in the analyses. Matching-to-Sample (MTS) Data (mts_data.csv) 28 participants 2 groups (between-subject variable): SMTS = stimulus equivalence classes were established using a simultaneous matching-to-sample protocol (SMTS) DMTS = stimulus equivalence classes were established using a delayed (2 seconds) matching-to-sample protocol (DMTS) Each of the three equivalence classes established during the MTS task was composed of one type of emotionally loaded stimuli (A stimuli): A1 = pictures of faces expressing happiness A2 = pictures of faces expressing anger A3 = pictures of faces expressing neutrality The experiment had 2 sessions (within-subject variable): Day 1 = Establishment of the derived relations and equivalence classes Day 30 = Testing the stability (maintenance) of the devived relations (third days after Day 1) For the MTS tasks, the establishment and the maintenance of the derived relations were assessed in two blocks of trials involving the BD/DB relations (aka equivalence tests) Each block (BD and DB) had 24 trials with no feedback for class-consistent or class-inconsistent responses and were the same on both Day 1 and Day 30 Semantic Differential (SD) Data (semantic_differential_data.csv) Participant <- Participants' IDs (n = 44) Group <- Between-subject variable. In the SMTS group (n = 14), participants learned conditional relations using a simultaneous matching-to-sample protocol and then evaluate the abstract stimuli D1, D2, and D3 using the Semantic Differential (SD) device. In the DMTS group (n = 14), a similar procedure was conducted using a delayed matching-to-sample protocol. Finally, Control group participants (n = 16) didn't receive training of conditional relations. They used the SD to evaluate faces expressing emotions (stimuli A1, A2, and A3) and the abstract stimuli D1, D2, and D3. Session <- Within-subject variable. Participants from the SMTS and DMTS groups evaluate the abstract stimuli D1, D2, and D3 right after the training of conditional relations (Day 1) and after a 30 days period (Day 30). Sample <- Stimuli evaluated by participants. Stimuli A1 are human faces expressing happiness, and stimuli D1 are supposed to carry that emotion. Stimuli A2 (faces) and D2 (abstract) are supposed to carry an angry emotion. Similarly, A3 and D3 stimuli are supposed to be emotionally neutral. Emotional_Valence <- labels the emotion related to the sample stimuli. face_number <- Each of the A stimuli (A1, A2, and A3) are composed of 4 different faces expressing some happy, angry, or neutral emotion. The other 13 columns of the data set are the ratings (from -3 to 3) participants gave to the stimuli based on opposite adjectives. The first nine items evaluate Factor 1 and usually is the focus of the analyses. The last four items are considered Factor 2.


Steps to reproduce

Steps to reproduce the analyses are included in the 'r_commands.R' file.


Associative Memory, Behavioral Psychology, Emotional Memory