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 *

87 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12365742)

  • 1. Duration-based measures of preference for vocational tasks.
    Worsdell AS; Iwata BA; Wallace MD
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2002; 35(3):287-90. PubMed ID: 12365742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluating the predictive validity of a single stimulus engagement preference assessment.
    Hagopian LP; Rush KS; Lewin AB; Long ES
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2001; 34(4):475-85. PubMed ID: 11800186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Evaluation of a brief stimulus preference assessment.
    Roane HS; Vollmer TR; Ringdahl JE; Marcus BA
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1998; 31(4):605-20. PubMed ID: 9891397
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of a video-based assessment and a multiple stimulus assessment to identify preferred jobs for individuals with significant intellectual disabilities.
    Horrocks EL; Morgan RL
    Res Dev Disabil; 2009; 30(5):902-9. PubMed ID: 19231132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparing preference assessments: selection- versus duration-based preference assessment procedures.
    Kodak T; Fisher WW; Kelley ME; Kisamore A
    Res Dev Disabil; 2009; 30(5):1068-77. PubMed ID: 19327964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The Assessment of Basic Learning Abilities (ABLA) test predicts the relative efficacy of task preferences for persons with developmental disabilities.
    Reyer HS; Sturmey P
    J Intellect Disabil Res; 2006 Jun; 50(Pt 6):404-9. PubMed ID: 16672034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. A comparison of verbal and tangible stimulus preference assessments.
    Cohen-Almeida D; Graff RB; Ahearn WH
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2000; 33(3):329-34. PubMed ID: 11051576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Longitudinal analysis of leisure-item preferences.
    Zhou L; Iwata BA; Goff GA; Shore BA
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2001; 34(2):179-84. PubMed ID: 11421310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Two measures of preference during forced-choice assessments.
    Derby KM; Wacker DP; Andelman M; Berg W; Drew J; Asmus J; Prouty AM; Laffey P
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1995; 28(3):345-6. PubMed ID: 7592152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The relation between choosing and working prevocational tasks in two severely retarded young adults.
    Mithaug DE; Mar DK
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1980; 13(1):177-82. PubMed ID: 6444930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Further evaluation of low-ranked items in stimulus-choice preference assessments.
    Taravella CC; Lerman DC; Contrucci SA; Roane HS
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2000; 33(1):105-8. PubMed ID: 10738960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The effects of choice and task preference on the work performance of adults with severe disabilities.
    Bambara LM; Ager C; Koger F
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1994; 27(3):555-6. PubMed ID: 7928796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Identifying work preferences among individuals with severe multiple disabilities prior to beginning supported work.
    Reid DH; Parsons MB; Green CW
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1998; 31(2):281-5. PubMed ID: 9652103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An evaluation of a brief functional analysis format within a vocational setting.
    Wallace MD; Knights DJ
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2003; 36(1):125-8. PubMed ID: 12723876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effect of active support training on engagement, opportunities for choice, challenging behaviour and support needs.
    Koritsas S; Iacono T; Hamilton D; Leighton D
    J Intellect Dev Disabil; 2008 Sep; 33(3):247-56. PubMed ID: 18752097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effects of Snoezelen room, Activities of Daily Living skills training, and Vocational skills training on aggression and self-injury by adults with mental retardation and mental illness.
    Singh NN; Lancioni GE; Winton AS; Molina EJ; Sage M; Brown S; Groeneweg J
    Res Dev Disabil; 2004; 25(3):285-93. PubMed ID: 15134793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of verbal preference assessments in the presence and absence of the actual stimuli.
    Kuhn DE; DeLeon IG; Terlonge C; Goysovich R
    Res Dev Disabil; 2006; 27(6):645-56. PubMed ID: 16263239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.