Español 253-261 (Español (España))
FLIP
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
Acta Colombiana de Psicología complies with international intellectual property and copyright laws, and particularly with Article No. 58 of the Political Constitution of Colombia, Law No. 23 of 1982, and the Agreement No. 172 of September 30, 2010 (Universidad Católica de Colombia Intellectual Property Regulation).
Authors retain their copyright and grant to the Acta Colombiana de Psicología the right of first publication, with the work registered under Creative Commons attribution license, which allows third parties to use the published material, provided they credit the authorship of the work and the first publication in this Journal.
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to propose equivalence relations as a structural criterion or analytical order, through which the functions of knowledge required in a scientific activity are delimited. It begins by considering knowledge as a phenomenon studied by psychology, whose explanation requires giving an account of the way in which such behavioral or knowledge functions are established, organized and updated. It is considered that the procedures of matching to-sample allow understanding the way of abstracting the analytical categories that scientifically structure the knowledge of reality. When using these procedures, new relationships are derived that without the need for direct training, cannot be explained based on principles of stimulus generalization, but rather as equivalent relations differentiated through previous training. They get a closure in an analytical category, once the categorical criteria are abstracted or if desired, when these relationships are nominated. And when categorized or nominated, they transcend the situation, since nominating is understood as an adjustment to conventional criteria. Once situational interactions are nominated, they regulate all social practices, including practices of scientific knowledge.
References
Aristóteles (trad. en 1980). Acerca del alma. Madrid: Gredos.
Barnes, D., & Roche, B. (1997). A behavior-Analytic approach to behavioral reflexivity. The Psychological Record, 47, 543-572.
Cambell, D. T. (1974). Evolutionary Epistemology. En. P. A. Shilpp, Lasalle & IL (Eds.) The philosophy of Karl R. Pop- per (pp.412-463). Open Court.
Carpio, C., Pacheco, V., Flores, C., & Canales, C. (2002). Aprendizaje de la práctica científica en Psicología. Perspectivas de la psicología experimental, 2. 47-71.
Castro, G. G., Mathiesen de Gregory, M. E., Mora, O., Merino, J. M., & Navarro, G. (2011). Habilidades lingüísticas y rendimiento académico en escolares talentosos. Revista CES Psicología, 5, 40-55. Recuperado de http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa-id=423539471004.
Cohen, I. B. (1980). The Newtonian revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Changeaux, J. P. (1985). Neuronal Man. New York: Pantheon. Darwin, Ch. (1859/1983). El origen de las especies. Madrid: SARPE.
Dugdale, N., & Lowe, C. F. (1990). Naming and stimulus equivalence. En D. E. Blackman & H. Lejeune (Eds.). Behaviour Analysis in Theory and Practice (pp. 115-138). Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass.
Edelman, G. M. (1987). Neural Darwinism: The Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. New York: Basic Books.
Fiorentini, L., Vernis, S., Arismendi, M., Primero, G., Argibay, J. C., Sánchez, F., Tabullo, A., Segura, E., & Yorio, A. A. (2013). Relaciones de equivalencia de estímulos y relaciones de equivalencia equivalencia: Efectos de la estructura de entrenamiento. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy,13, 233-242.
Hayes S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Kluwer Academic.
Hayes, L. J., Tilley, K. J., & Hayes, S. C. (1988). Extending equivalence class membership to gustatory stimuli. The Psychological Record, 38, 473-482.
Hayes, S. C., & Hayes, L. J. (1989). The verbal action of the lis- tener as a basis for ruler-governance. En S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Ruler-governed behavior: Cognition, contingencies, and instructional control (pp.153-190). New York: Plenum.
Kant, I. (1781/2016). Crítica de la razón pura. Madrid: Tecnos.
Kantor. J. R., & Smith, N. W. (1975). The Science of Psychology: An Interbehavioral Survey. Chicago: Principia Press.
Kuhn, T. S. (1971). La estructura de las revoluciones científicas. México: Fondo de la cultura económica.
Lorenz, K. (1977). Behind the mirror. London: Methuen.
Padilla, M. A. (2003). Un análisis experimental de la dominan- cia de categorías teóricas en la práctica científica (Tesis doctoral). Universidad de Guadalajara, México.
Padilla, M. A. (2014). Análisis del tipo de interacciones que ocurren entre investigadores durante la presentación de trabajos académicos. Acta Colombiana de Psicología, 17, 35- 44. doi: 10.14718/ ACP.2014.17.1.4.
Palmer, D. C., & Donahoe, J. W. (1992). Essentialism and selectionism in cognitive science and behavior analysis. American Psychologist, 47, 1344-1358.
Pepper, S. C. (1942). World hypotheses. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Piaget, J. (1977). Psychology and Epistemology: Towards a Theory of Knowledge. New Zealand: Penguin Books.
Piaget, J., & Garcia, R. (1982). Psicogénesis e historia de la ciencia. Madrid: Siglo XXI.
Peirce, Ch. S. (1878/1935). Scientific Metaphysics. En Charles Hartshorne & Paul Weiss (Eds.), Collected Papers, vol. 6. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pinker, S. (1997). How the mind work. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Platón (trad. en 1993). Diálogos. Bogotá: Panamericana Edito- rial Limitada.
Ribes, E. (2003). Concepts and theories: Relation to scientific categories. En C. A. Lattal & P. N. Chase (Eds.), Behavior Theory and Phylosophy (pp. 147-164). New York: Kluwer Academic.
Ribes, E. (2010). Teoría de la conducta 2: Avances y extensiones. México: Trillas.
Ruiz, F. J., & Luciano, C. (2012). Relacionar relaciones como modelo analítico-funcional de la analogía y la metáfora. Acta Comportamentalia: Revista Latina de Análisis de Comportamiento, 20, 5-31.
Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. Nueva York: Barnes & Noble.
Sarmiento, J. C. (2011). Conocer: Una Visión Epistémica. Acta Colombiana de Psicología, 14, 81-97.
Saunders, R. R., Wachter, J., & Spradlin, J. E. (1988). Establish- ing auditory stimulus control over an eight-member stimulus class via conditional discrimination procedures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 49, 95-115.
Sidman, M. (1994). Equivalence relations and behavior: A research story. Boston: Authors Cooperative, Inc.
Sidman, M. (1971). Reading and auditory -visual equivalences. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 14, 5-13.
Sidman, M. (1986). Functional analysis of emergent verbal class. En T. Thompson & M. D. Zeiler (Eds.), Analysis and integration of behavior units (pp. 213-245). Hillsdale, N. J. Lawrence Erlbaum associates.
Skinner, B. F. (1981). Selection by Consequences. Science, 213, 501-504. Skinner, B. F. (1957/1981). Conducta Verbal. México: Trillas.
Tomás, St. (2009). Compendium of Theology. (Traduccion de Regan, R. J). New York: Oxford University Press.
Wittgenstein, L. (1953/1988). Investigaciones filosóficas. México: UNAM.
Weinberg, S. (2015). Explicar el mundo. Bogotá: Penguin Random Hause.
Young, R. M. (1970). Mind, brain and adaptation in the nineteenth century: Cerebral localization and its biological contex from Gall to ferrier. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Reference by
