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 *

142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20354596)

  • 21. Concurrent progressive ratio schedules: Effects of reinforcer probability on breakpoint and response allocation.
    Jarmolowicz DP; Sofis MJ; Darden AC
    Behav Processes; 2016 Jul; 128():103-7. PubMed ID: 27131782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Steady-state choice between four alternatives obeys the constant-ratio rule.
    Bensemann J; Lobb B; Podlesnik CA; Elliffe D
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2015 Jul; 104(1):7-19. PubMed ID: 25989016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Choice dynamics in concurrent ratio schedules of reinforcement.
    Bellow D; Lattal KA
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2023 Mar; 119(2):337-355. PubMed ID: 36718124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Frequency and value both matter in the suboptimal choice procedure.
    Pisklak JM; McDevitt MA; Dunn RM; Spetch ML
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2019 Jan; 111(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 30569554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Rats' choices with token stimuli in concurrent variable-interval schedules.
    Mazur JE
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2014 Sep; 102(2):198-212. PubMed ID: 25130299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Sensitivity to relative reinforcer rate in concurrent schedules: independence from relative and absolute reinforcer duration.
    McLean AP; Blampied NM
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2001 Jan; 75(1):25-42. PubMed ID: 11256865
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Resurgence as Choice in Context: Treatment duration and on/off alternative reinforcement.
    Shahan TA; Browning KO; Nall RW
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2020 Jan; 113(1):57-76. PubMed ID: 31777091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The generalized matching law as a predictor of choice between cocaine and food in rhesus monkeys.
    Anderson KG; Velkey AJ; Woolverton WL
    Psychopharmacology (Berl); 2002 Oct; 163(3-4):319-26. PubMed ID: 12373433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Overmatching in rats: the barrier choice paradigm.
    Aparicio CF
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2001 Jan; 75(1):93-106. PubMed ID: 11256869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Acquisition of operant behavior in rats with delayed reinforcement: A retractable-lever procedure.
    McNamara AA; Johnson LE; Tate C; Chiang T; Byrne T
    Behav Processes; 2015 Feb; 111():37-41. PubMed ID: 25464338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Human choice under schedules of negative reinforcement.
    Alessandri J; Cançado CR
    Behav Processes; 2015 Dec; 121():70-3. PubMed ID: 26518610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Fix and sample with rats in the dynamics of choice.
    Aparicio CF; Baum WM
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2006 Jul; 86(1):43-63. PubMed ID: 16903492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Reinforcer magnitude and resurgence.
    Oliver AC; Nighbor TD; Lattal KA
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2018 Nov; 110(3):440-450. PubMed ID: 30431659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Effects of adding a second reinforcement alternative: implications for Herrnstein's interpretation of r(e).
    Soto PL; McDowell JJ; Dallery J
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2005 Sep; 84(2):185-225. PubMed ID: 16262186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The stay/switch model describes choice among magnitudes of reinforcers.
    MacDonall JS
    Behav Processes; 2008 Jun; 78(2):173-84. PubMed ID: 18406545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Editorial: choice studies in transition.
    Jozefowiez J; McDowell JJ; Staddon JE
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2010 Sep; 94(2):159-60. PubMed ID: 21451745
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Effects of reinforcer quality and step size on rats' performance under progressive ratio schedules.
    Covarrubias P; Aparicio CF
    Behav Processes; 2008 Jun; 78(2):246-52. PubMed ID: 18346855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Comparing choices and variations in people and rats: two teaching experiments.
    Neuringer A; Deiss C; Imig S
    Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput; 2000 Aug; 32(3):407-16. PubMed ID: 11029813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Sensitivity to delay is affected by magnitude of reinforcement in rats.
    Orduña V; Valencia-Torres L; Cruz G; Bouzas A
    Behav Processes; 2013 Sep; 98():18-24. PubMed ID: 23624099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Failure to find a distance effect in pigeon choice: Manipulating amount and delay of reinforcement.
    Sanabria F; Bell MC
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2020 Nov; 114(3):276-290. PubMed ID: 33034054
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.