ArticleJournal of the experimental analysis of behavior2026
Differential reinforcement using matched examples and nonexamples expedites the practice needed to learn concepts.
Article in Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Differential reinforcement using matched examples and nonexamples expedites the practice needed to learn concepts.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conceptual learning refers to correctly identifying novel examples and nonexamples of a concept. Concepts can be taught by presenting stimuli and differentially reinforcing responses to examples but not nonexamples. However, it is unclear which stimuli should be used and whether specifically designed stimuli can result in correct responding even in the absence of differential reinforcement. Stimulus selection can be informed by identifying features that a stimulus must have to be an example and can have without altering whether the stimulus is an example or a nonexample. Previous research suggests that using matched examples and nonexamples (the same can-have features present) may expedite this learning. Experiment 1 compared acquisition and conceptual learning following practice with matched and unmatched examples and nonexamples lacking exactly one must-have feature. Participants made fewer errors and completed practice faster with matched examples and nonexamples. Both practice conditions produced similar conceptual learning. Some participants also responded accurately during baseline. To evaluate whether the testing stimuli would produce conceptual learning in the absence of differential reinforcement, Experiment 2 compared conceptual learning without any practice. No conceptual learning was observed. The results support using matched examples and nonexamples for additional research on conceptual learning in classroom and laboratory settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.