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 *

92 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11868235)

  • 1. Second-order contrast based on the expectation of effort and reinforcement.
    Clement TS; Zentall TR
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 2002 Jan; 28(1):64-74. PubMed ID: 11868235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Discriminative stimuli that follow the absence of reinforcement are preferred by pigeons over those that follow reinforcement.
    Friedrich AM; Clement TS; Zentall TR
    Learn Behav; 2005 Aug; 33(3):337-42. PubMed ID: 16396080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Discriminative stimuli that follow a delay have added value for pigeons.
    DiGian KA; Friedrich AM; Zentall TR
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2004 Oct; 11(5):889-95. PubMed ID: 15732699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Pigeons prefer discriminative stimuli independently of the overall probability of reinforcement and of the number of presentations of the conditioned reinforcer.
    Stagner JP; Laude JR; Zentall TR
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 2012 Oct; 38(4):446-52. PubMed ID: 23066982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Superordinate category formation in pigeons: association with a common delay or probability of food reinforcement makes perceptually dissimilar stimuli functionally equivalent.
    Astley SL; Wasserman EA
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 1999 Oct; 25(4):415-32. PubMed ID: 10531658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Preference for a stimulus that follows a relatively aversive event: contrast or delay reduction?
    Singer RA; Berry LM; Zentall TR
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2007 Mar; 87(2):275-85. PubMed ID: 17465316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Failure to replicate the 'work ethic" effect in pigeons.
    Vasconcelos M; Urcuioli PJ; Lionello-DeNolf KM
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2007 May; 87(3):383-99. PubMed ID: 17575903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Imitative learning of stimulus-response and response-outcome associations in pigeons.
    Saggerson AL; George DN; Honey RC
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 2005 Jul; 31(3):289-300. PubMed ID: 16045384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Timing in pigeons: effects of the similarity between intertrial interval and gap in a timing signal.
    Kaiser DH; Zentall TR; Neiman E
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 2002 Oct; 28(4):416-22. PubMed ID: 12395499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Influence of budget and reinforcement location on risk-sensitive preference.
    O'Daly M; Case DA; Fantino E
    Behav Processes; 2006 Sep; 73(2):125-35. PubMed ID: 16737783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The effect of intruded events on peak time: the role of reinforcement history during the intruded event.
    Aum S; Brown BL; Hemmes NS
    Behav Processes; 2007 Feb; 74(2):187-97. PubMed ID: 17157998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Within-trial contrast: The effect of probability of reinforcement in training.
    Gipson CD; Miller HC; Alessandri JJ; Zentall TR
    Behav Processes; 2009 Oct; 82(2):126-32. PubMed ID: 19607889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Aftereffects of the surprising presentation and omission of appetitive reinforcers on key-pecking performance in pigeons.
    Stout SC; Muzio RN; Boughner RL; Papini MR
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 2002 Jul; 28(3):242-56. PubMed ID: 12136701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Reinforcer probability, reinforcer magnitude, and the reinforcement context for remembering.
    Brown GS; White KG
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 2009 Apr; 35(2):238-49. PubMed ID: 19364232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of signaling reinforcement on resistance to change in a multiple schedule.
    Bell MC; Seip KM; Fitzsimmons KS
    Behav Processes; 2007 Jan; 74(1):33-48. PubMed ID: 17071019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Matching-to-sample by pigeons: the dissociation of comparison choice frequency from the probability of reinforcement.
    Zentall TR; Singer RA; Miller HC
    Behav Processes; 2008 Jun; 78(2):185-90. PubMed ID: 18325692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. DISCRIMINATIVE FUNCTIONS BASED ON A DELAY IN THE REINFORCEMENT RELATION.
    MABRY JH
    J Exp Anal Behav; 1965 Mar; 8(2):97-103. PubMed ID: 14269568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Effect of stimulus orderability and reinforcement history on transitive responding in pigeons.
    Lazareva OF; Wasserman EA
    Behav Processes; 2006 May; 72(2):161-72. PubMed ID: 16460886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Failure to obtain value enhancement by within-trial contrast in simultaneous and successive discriminations.
    Arantes J; Grace RC
    Learn Behav; 2008 Feb; 36(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 18318421
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Transfer to intermediate forms following concept discrimination by pigeons: chimeras and morphs.
    Ghosh N; Lea SE; Noury M
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2004 Sep; 82(2):125-41. PubMed ID: 15540501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.