Increasing evidence suggests that the relatedness of stimuli within the Function Acquisition Speed Test (FAST) methodology is sensitive to the learning histories of participants. For example, this method is sensitive to differences in the amount of baseline training provided to establish stimulus equivalence relations using arbitrary stimuli (Cummins et al., 2018a). However, it has not yet been investigated whether the relatedness of stimuli within the FAST varies based on differential nodal distances between stimuli within stimulus classes. If so, the FAST could serve an important adjunct assessment procedure for researchers who wish not only to assess the formation of stimulus classes using traditional methods, such as matching-to-sample, but also the relative relatedness of stimuli within complex stimulus classes (i.e., nodal distance). The current study sought to investigate this possibility. Participants (n = 16) were trained in the formation of two 4-member equivalence classes consisting of arbitrary nonsense syllables. Following this, participants completed three FAST assessments, each of which probed for the relatedness of stimulus pairs of differing nodal distance. Group- and individual-level analyses broadly demonstrated that relatedness varied as a function of nodal distances in pre-trained stimulus classes. However, results also highlighted some limitations of the FAST at the individual level.

中文翻译：

---

使用函数获取速度测试测量差分节点距离

越来越多的证据表明，功能习得速度测试 (FAST) 方法中刺激的相关性对参与者的学习历史很敏感。例如，这种方法对使用任意刺激建立刺激等效关系所提供的基线训练量的差异很敏感（Cummins 等人，2018a）。然而，还没有研究 FAST 内刺激的相关性是否会根据刺激类别内的刺激之间的不同节点距离而变化。如果是这样，FAST 可以为研究人员提供一个重要的辅助评估程序，他们不仅希望使用传统方法（例如样本匹配）评估刺激类别的形成，而且还希望评估复杂刺激类别中刺激的相对相关性（即，节点距离）。目前的研究试图调查这种可能性。参与者 (n = 16) 接受了形成两个由任意无意义音节组成的 4 成员等价类的培训。在此之后，参与者完成了三个 FAST 评估，每个评估都探讨了不同节点距离的刺激对的相关性。群体和个人层面的分析广泛表明，相关性随预训练刺激类中节点距离的函数而变化。然而，结果也突出了 FAST 在个人层面的一些局限性。每个都探讨了不同节点距离的刺激对的相关性。群体和个人层面的分析广泛表明，相关性随预训练刺激类中节点距离的函数而变化。然而，结果也突出了 FAST 在个人层面的一些局限性。每个都探讨了不同节点距离的刺激对的相关性。群体和个人层面的分析广泛地表明，相关性随预训练刺激类中节点距离的函数而变化。然而，结果也突出了 FAST 在个人层面的一些局限性。