ANTICIPATION OF MATCHING 1313

the cursor on one of the three comparison stimuli and clicking on the
mouse. Responding on each trial was followed by a screen stating whether
the response was correct or incorrect. At the end of each session, subjects
were informed about the cumulative number of correct answers.

Transfer tests.—These consisted of two sessions of extramodal and intra—

modal testing. On intramodal trials, new stimuli were presented, varying also
in shape and color. On extramodal trials, the same stimuli presented during
the previous training were employed, with the difference that the criterion of
color was replaced by size. Subjects had to make their choice by placing the
cursor on one of the three comparison stimuli and clicking on the mouse.
There was no feedback after each trial, but information was provided at the
end of the session, in the form of the cumulative number of correct re—
sponses in that session.

Posttest.—The same procedure as at pretest was followed.

RESULTS

Fig. 3 shows the percentages of correct matching responses during pre—

test and posttest, observational or instrumental training, and transfer tests
for each subject.

In the first phase of training, the accuracy of the anticipated matching

response was higher (almost 100% correct) for the subjects who had to utter
the comparison stimulus or justify the selection of a comparison stimulus
(Conditions 6, 7, 8). On the other hand, the subjects who had to mark a
window or a stimulus or who had to choose the comparison stimulus (Con—
ditions 3, 4, and 5 and the instrumental Control group), performed more
poorly. Only one or two showed percentages of correct anticipated matching
responses close to 90 or 100% in the first two sessions; seven of the 16 sub—
jects never reached more than 70% correct responses. The subjects who
showed this high performance were those who showed higher percentages of
correct responses during the pretest.

All subjects who showed higher accuracy during the anticipated match—
ing conditions achieved 80 to 100% of correct responses during the first
transfer tests. The same effect was observed in the subjects exposed to the
mental anticipation condition without interference (Condition 1). More than
half of the subjects who had to mark a window (Conditions 3 and 4) and
the control subjects under observational training also showed high percent-
ages of correct responding during these transfer tests. Only one of the sub—
jects exposed to the condition of mental anticipation with auditory interfer—
ence (Condition 2) achieved 100% of correct responses during transfer tests;
the remaining subjects showed less than 40% correct responses.

During the second training phase (with instrumental training in all con-
ditions), most subjects achieved 90 to 100% of correct responses, excepting