Abstract
Five adult humans were tested for emergent conditional discriminations under rapid-responding contingencies. During four-comparison matching-to-sample baseline training (AB and AC), limited-hold contingencies for responding to samples and comparisons were gradually restricted to the shortest duration consistent with at least 95% accuracy and no more than 5% failures to respond. The final limited-hold values were 0.4-0.5 s for samples and 1.2-1.3 s for comparisons; mean response latencies were 0.15-0.28 s for samples and 0.59-0.73 s for comparisons; inter-trial intervals were 0.4 s. With these fast-responding requirements, test blocks presented 72 probe trials interspersed among 72 baseline trials, all without programmed differential consequences. Four equivalence test blocks (BC and CB probes, which tested simultaneously for both symmetry and transitivity) were followed by four symmetry (BA and CA probes) test blocks. Three subjects' results documented emergent performances indicative of equivalence classes despite fast-responding requirements that severely limited the time available for mediating vocal or subvocal responses. For these three subjects, mean latencies were slightly shorter in baseline trials than in probes, and shorter on symmetry than on equivalence probes. These differences, however, were usually less than the differences among mean latencies on the different types of trials within the baseline and probed performances.