“Being a cognitive psychologist myself, I can see at least three important ways in which RFT can contribute to cognitive science. First, it puts forward novel ideas about the development of language and thought, as well as intriguing insights in possible core differences between human and non-human cognition. These ideas are bound to inspire researchers irrespective of the research tradition in which they operate. Second, RFT highlights a number of new behavioral phenomena (e.g., different types of arbitrary applicable relational responding) that still require an explanation in terms of mediating mental mechanisms and that thus pose a challenge to cognitive researchers. Third, and perhaps most importantly, RFT provides novel ways of describing to-be-explained phenomena without using explanatory mental concepts. As such, RFT can help strengthen cognitive science by allowing researchers to conceptualize the phenomena that they study independently from the concepts that they use to explain these phenomena.”

1. New ideas about the development of language and thought - Most cognitive psychologist just start from the fact that people have language and thought => is a given (but developmental cogn psy) - RFT includes ideas about the distal learning history that underlies language and thought Ways to impress cognitive psychologists: - developmental studies supporting RFT theory - intervention studies showing that deficiencies in language and thought can be remedied by focussing on those experiences that are crucial according to RFT - contribute to language capabilities of computer models / artificial system by providing experiences that RFT claims to be crucial Contribution of RFT – ACBS Minneapolis – 21 June 2014

Ways to evoke a “so what” reaction: build lab models of language and thought e.g., AARR as a phenomenon => just “use” language and thought e.g., models of instructions (i.e., relational networks) Contribution of RFT – ACBS Minneapolis – 21 June 2014

2. New behavioral phenomena Contribution of RFT – ACBS Minneapolis – 21 June 2014 Cognitive: 2nd level of explanation Environment: Description Functional: 1st level of explanation Increase in salivation is due to pairing of bell and food = classical conditioning as an effect The fact that statistical contingency increases salivation is due to formation of associations in memory

3. Describing to-be-explained phenomena in non-mental ways -Cognitive psychologists have to deal with the environment and effects (= environment-behavior relations) but they describe these effects either in topographical terms or mental terms (as proxies) -RFT and functional psychology in general offer functional descriptions of effects that are abstract but non-mental => Stroop color-word effect BLUE - J. R. Stroop - emotional Stroop SPIDER - stimulus control => instructions (Hughes & De Houwer, in preparation) Contribution of RFT – ACBS Minneapolis – 21 June 2014

Additional contribution: Ways to influence  philosophically, aim of cognitive psychology is to predict (model of mechanism)  But increasing (funding) pressure to influence (“show me the value for money”) Linking up with functional psychology would allow them to add the influence while maintaining the focus on the mechanism (i.e., how does the influence work and how might we improve it) Contribution of RFT – ACBS Minneapolis – 21 June 2014

BUT building bridges is not easy (see Sean Hughes) - don’t focus on war of aims => starting point is to acknowledge the right of both approaches to exist given the different aims - next, focus on concrete contributions (not potential of contribution) => “show me the money” Contribution of RFT – ACBS Minneapolis – 21 June 2014

Finally, also cognitive psychology can offer something to RFT! => It has to be a two-way street 1. Huge literature providing functional knowledge on virtually every aspect of human behavior => requires translation of phenomena studied in cognitive psychology using functional terms (Rosetta stone) - learning = impact of regularities on behavior - attitudes = evaluation - cognitive control = stimulus control - attention = stimulus control - motivation = establishing operations - instructions = complex relational networks See De Houwer et al., 2013a, 2013b, in preparation. Contribution of RFT – ACBS Minneapolis – 21 June 2014

2. Cognitive theories and research can have an orienting function - new areas of research (e.g., implicit cognition) - new moderators of phenomena => proof of the pudding is in the eating (or: “show me the money”) 3. Reconnect with mainstream psychology - (academic) functional psychology is (relatively) small, isolated, and fractionated - time to overcome these divides within functional psychology and between functional and cognitive psychology to improve psychology as a whole with the aim of “Creating a science more adequate to the challenge of the human condition” (Hayes et al., 2012) Contribution of RFT – ACBS Minneapolis – 21 June 2014