The purpose of this study was to compare systematically the effectiveness of the respondent-type training procedure and the matching-to-sample training procedure. In Experiment 1, a within-subject design was used, to compare the effectiveness of the two procedures. In Condition 1, students were trained using the respondent-type training procedure (60 training trials) and tested for the emergence of symmetry and equivalence responding using a matching-to-sample test. Students were subsequently trained using the matching-to-sample training procedure (60 training trials) and tested using a matching-to-sample test. In Condition 2, the order of the training and testing was reversed (i.e., i, MTS training; ii, MTS test, iii, respondent training; iv, MTS test). Experiment 2 was identical to Experiment 1, except that during matching-to-sample training subjects were required to produce 12 consecutively correct responses before an equivalence test. During respondent-type training students were presented with 12 training trials. Experiment 3 was identical to Experiment 2 except that the two negative comparisons were removed from matching-to-sample training. Experiment 4 was identical to Experiment 3 except that the correct comparison appeared to the right, center, or left of the screen and three response keys were used. In Experiments 1, 2, and 3 respondent-type training was more effective than matching-to-sample training. In Experiment 4 when the negative comparisons were removed from matching-to-sample training and when the spatial position of the correct comparison varied both procedures were equally effective.