Can the naming hypothesis be falsified?

Article Abstract:

Horne and Lowe argued in their paper that the concept of stimulus equivalence can be better understood by turning their attention to the study of naming. They supported this claim with controversial explanation supporting naming as the basic unit of both verbal behavior and derived stimulus relations. However, their naming account of stimulus equivalence suffer from certain weaknesses, most critical of which is the account's potential for empirical disconfirmation.

---

Methodological issues in the study of naming

Article Abstract:

Horne and Lowe provide a well-developed and controversial account of the naming hypothesis. The three main elements of their hypothesis are equivalence in nonhumans, equivalence in nonverbal humans and naming manipulations and equivalence in verbal humans. Although Horne and Lowe argue that existing evidence supports the naming hypothesis, methodological problems that made critical experiments hard to perform.

---

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Joint control and word-object bidirectionality. Naming as a technical term: sacrificing behavior analysis at the altar of popularity
• Abstracts: Experimental analysis of naming behavior cannot explain naming capacity. Natural contingencies in the creation of naming as a higher order behavior class

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.