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 *

145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20354596)

  • 1. Barycentric extension of generalized matching.
    Jensen G; Neuringer A
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2009 Sep; 92(2):139-59. PubMed ID: 20354596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Quantification of ethanol's antipunishment effect in humans using the generalized matching equation.
    Rasmussen EB; Newland MC
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2009 Sep; 92(2):161-80. PubMed ID: 20354597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Choosing among multiple alternatives: Relative and overall reinforcer rates.
    Beeby E; Alsop B
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2017 Sep; 108(2):204-222. PubMed ID: 28758210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Exclusive preference develops less readily on concurrent ratio schedules with wheel-running than with sucrose reinforcement.
    Belke TW
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2010 Sep; 94(2):135-58. PubMed ID: 21451744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Obese and lean Zucker rats demonstrate differential sensitivity to rates of food reinforcement in a choice procedure.
    Buckley JL; Rasmussen EB
    Physiol Behav; 2012 Dec; 108():19-27. PubMed ID: 23046726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Choice among two and three alternatives.
    Beeby E; Alsop B
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2017 May; 107(3):369-387. PubMed ID: 28516673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Concurrent schedules: How responses per reinforcer affects estimates of sensitivity to reinforcement.
    Davison M
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2021 Jul; 116(1):114-123. PubMed ID: 33997983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Contingency discriminability and the generalized matching law describe choice on concurrent ratio schedules of wheel-running reinforcement.
    Belke TW
    Behav Processes; 2012 Jul; 90(3):291-301. PubMed ID: 22414348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The effects of a local negative feedback function between choice and relative reinforcer rate.
    Davison M; Elliffe D; Marr MJ
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2010 Sep; 94(2):197-207. PubMed ID: 21451748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Within-session transitions in choice: a structural and quantitative analysis.
    Banna KM; Newland MC
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2009 May; 91(3):319-35. PubMed ID: 19949490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Choice as a function of reinforcer "hold": from probability learning to concurrent reinforcement.
    Jensen G; Neuringer A
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 2008 Oct; 34(4):437-60. PubMed ID: 18954229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Selection dynamics in joint matching to rate and magnitude of reinforcement.
    McDowell JJ; Popa A; Calvin NT
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2012 Sep; 98(2):199-212. PubMed ID: 23008523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Delay-amount tradeoffs in choices by pigeons and rats: hyperbolic versus exponential discounting.
    Mazur JE; Biondi DR
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2009 Mar; 91(2):197-211. PubMed ID: 19794834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Zebrafish choice behavior is sensitive to reinforcer rate, immediacy, and magnitude ratios.
    Kuroda T; Ritchey CM; Podlesnik CA
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2021 Sep; 116(2):182-207. PubMed ID: 34223635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Choice for response alternatives differing in reinforcement frequency in dopamine D2 receptor mutant and Swiss-Webster mice.
    Soto PL; Hiranita T; Grandy DK; Katz JL
    Psychopharmacology (Berl); 2014 Aug; 231(16):3169-77. PubMed ID: 24682471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Matching law analysis of rats' alcohol self-administration in a free-operant choice procedure.
    Jimenez-Gomez C; Shahan TA
    Behav Pharmacol; 2008 Jul; 19(4):353-6. PubMed ID: 18622184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Sensitivity to pre- and post-reinforcer delays in self-control choice.
    Yamaguchi T; Saeki D; Ito M
    Behav Processes; 2015 Dec; 121():8-12. PubMed ID: 26456039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Concurrent reinforcement schedules for problem behavior and appropriate behavior: experimental applications of the matching law.
    Borrero CS; Vollmer TR; Borrero JC; Bourret JC; Sloman KN; Samaha AL; Dallery J
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2010 May; 93(3):455-69. PubMed ID: 21119856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Signaled reinforcement: Effects of signal reliability on choice between signaled and unsignaled alternatives.
    Gomes-Ng S; Macababbad AC; Bai JYH; Baharrizki D; Elliffe D; Cowie S
    Behav Processes; 2020 May; 174():104088. PubMed ID: 32092454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Gestational exposure to methylmercury retards choice in transition in aging rats.
    Newland MC; Reile PA; Langston JL
    Neurotoxicol Teratol; 2004; 26(2):179-94. PubMed ID: 15019952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.