These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11051576)

  • 21. Evaluation of assessment methods for identifying social reinforcers.
    Kelly MA; Roscoe EM; Hanley GP; Schlichenmeyer K
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2014; 47(1):113-35. PubMed ID: 24604393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. A comparison of reinforcer assessment methods: the utility of verbal and pictorial choice procedures.
    Northup J; George T; Jones K; Broussard C; Vollmer TR
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1996; 29(2):201-12. PubMed ID: 8682736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Manipulating the behavior-altering effect of the motivating operation: examination of the influence on challenging behavior during leisure activities.
    O'Reilly MF; Sigafoos J; Lancioni G; Rispoli M; Lang R; Chan J; Machalicek W; Langthorne P
    Res Dev Disabil; 2008; 29(4):333-40. PubMed ID: 17629672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Evaluating the use of computerized stimulus preference assessments in foster care.
    Whitehouse CM; Vollmer TR; Colbert B
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2014; 47(3):470-84. PubMed ID: 24966135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The effects of establishing operations on preferences for tangible items.
    McAdam DB; Klatt KP; Koffarnus M; Dicesare A; Solberg K; Welch C; Murphy S
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2005; 38(1):107-10. PubMed ID: 15898479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. The effects of establishing operations on preference assessment outcomes.
    Gottschalk JM; Libby ME; Graff RB
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2000; 33(1):85-8. PubMed ID: 10738955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Preference assessment procedures for individuals with developmental disabilities.
    Hagopian LP; Long ES; Rush KS
    Behav Modif; 2004 Sep; 28(5):668-77. PubMed ID: 15296524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Functional analysis and treatment of verbal perseverations displayed by an adult with autism.
    Rehfeldt RA; Chambers MR
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2003; 36(2):259-61. PubMed ID: 12858991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Individualized sampling parameters for behavioral observations: enhancing the predictive validity of competing stimulus assessments.
    DeLeon IG; Toole LM; Gutshall KA; Bowman LG
    Res Dev Disabil; 2005; 26(5):440-55. PubMed ID: 16168882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Changing preference from tangible to social activities through an observation procedure.
    Leaf JB; Oppenheim-Leaf ML; Townley-Cochran D; Leaf JA; Alcalay A; Milne C; Kassardjian A; Tsuji K; Dale S; Leaf R; Taubman M; McEachin J
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2016 Mar; 49(1):49-57. PubMed ID: 26660202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Assessment and treatment of problem behavior maintained by escape from attention and access to tangible items.
    Hagopian LP; Wilson DM; Wilder DA
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2001; 34(2):229-32. PubMed ID: 11421317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Examination of relative reinforcement effects of stimuli identified through pretreatment and daily brief preference assessments.
    DeLeon IG; Fisher WW; Rodriguez-Catter V; Maglieri K; Herman K; Marhefka JM
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2001; 34(4):463-73. PubMed ID: 11800185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Preference for water-related items in Angelman syndrome, Down syndrome and non-specific intellectual disability.
    Didden R; Korzilius H; Sturmey P; Lancioni GE; Curfs LM
    J Intellect Dev Disabil; 2008 Mar; 33(1):59-64. PubMed ID: 18300168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Effects of deprivation on engagement in preferred activities by persons with developmental disabilities.
    Klatt KP; Sherman JA; Sheldon JB
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2000; 33(4):495-506. PubMed ID: 11214025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Predicting the relative efficacy of verbal, pictorial, and tangible stimuli for assessing preferences of leisure activities.
    de Vries C; Yu CT; Sakko G; Wirth KM; Walters KL; Marion C; Martin GL
    Am J Ment Retard; 2005 Mar; 110(2):145-54. PubMed ID: 15762824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. An evaluation of the effects of access duration on preference assessment outcomes.
    Jones BA; Dozier CL; Neidert PL
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2014; 47(1):209-13. PubMed ID: 24535847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Why cooperate? An economic perspective is not enough.
    Schuster R; Perelberg A
    Behav Processes; 2004 Jun; 66(3):261-77. PubMed ID: 15157976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Using a Time Timer to increase appropriate waiting behavior in a child with developmental disabilities.
    Grey I; Healy O; Leader G; Hayes D
    Res Dev Disabil; 2009; 30(2):359-66. PubMed ID: 18926663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The effects of providing access to stimuli following choice making during vocal preference assessments.
    Tessing JL; Napolitano DA; McAdam DB; DiCesare A; Axelrod S
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2006; 39(4):501-6. PubMed ID: 17236351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Effects of increased response effort and reinforcer delay on choice and aberrant behavior.
    Gwinn MM; Derby KM; Fisher W; Kurtz P; Fahs A; Augustine M; McLaughlin TF
    Behav Modif; 2005 Jul; 29(4):642-52. PubMed ID: 15911686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.