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 *

89 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27178093)

  • 1. A multiple-stimulus-without-replacement assessment for sexual partners: Purchase task validation.
    Jarmolowicz DP; Lemley SM; Mateos A; Sofis MJ
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2016 Sep; 49(3):723-9. PubMed ID: 27178093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A multiple-stimulus-without-replacement assessment for sexual partners: Test-retest stability.
    Jarmolowicz DP; LeComte RS; Lemley SM
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2022 Oct; 55(4):1059-1067. PubMed ID: 35739612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. An evaluation of a brief multiple-stimulus preference assessment with adolescents with emotional-behavioral disorders in an educational setting.
    Paramore NW; Higbee TS
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2005; 38(3):399-403. PubMed ID: 16270849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Further refinement of video-based brief multiple-stimulus without replacement preference assessments.
    Brodhead MT; Abston GW; Mates M; Abel EA
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2017 Jan; 50(1):170-175. PubMed ID: 27766655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Validity of the multiple-stimulus without replacement preference assessment for edible items.
    Fritz JN; Roath CT; Shoemaker PT; Edwards AB; Hussein LA; Villante NK; Langlinais CA; Rettig LA
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2020 Jul; 53(3):1688-1701. PubMed ID: 32307709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparing the results of one-session, two-session, and three-session MSWO preference assessments.
    Conine DE; Morris SL; Kronfli FR; Slanzi CM; Petronelli AK; Kalick L; Vollmer TR
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2021 Apr; 54(2):700-712. PubMed ID: 33465255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences.
    DeLeon IG; Iwata BA
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1996; 29(4):519-32; quiz 532-3. PubMed ID: 8995834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of the multiple-stimulus without replacement preference assessment method using activities as stimuli.
    Daly EJ; Wells NJ; Swanger-Gagné MS; Carr JE; Kunz GM; Taylor AM
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2009; 42(3):563-74. PubMed ID: 20190919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [An investigation on the epidemic situation of intimate partner violence in 2,575 college students].
    Su PY; Hao JH; Huang ZH; Xiao LM; Tao FB
    Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi; 2011 Apr; 32(4):346-51. PubMed ID: 21569664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. An evaluation of preference stability within MSWO preference assessments for children with autism.
    Melanson IJ; Thomas AL; Brodhead MT; Sipila-Thomas ES; Miranda DRG; Plavnick JB; Joy TA; Fisher MH; White-Cascarilla AN
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2023 Jun; 56(3):638-655. PubMed ID: 37166411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The Hotel Room Purchase Task: Effects of Gender and Partner Desirability on Demand for Hypothetical Sex in Individuals with Disordered Cocaine Use and Controls.
    Dolan SB; Johnson PS; Johnson MW
    Arch Sex Behav; 2020 May; 49(4):1251-1262. PubMed ID: 31989411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The multiple-stimulus-without-replacement preference assessment tool and its predictive validity.
    Curiel H; Curiel ESL; Villanueva S; Ayala CEG; Cadigan AS
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2024 Jan; 57(1):226-235. PubMed ID: 37937467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Heterosexuals and HIV transmission: where do we go from here?
    Kippax S; Crawford J
    Natl AIDS Bull; 1991 Jul; 5(6):14-7. PubMed ID: 12179695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Men and women as perpetrators and victims of sexual aggression in heterosexual and same-sex encounters: a study of first-year college students in Germany.
    Krahé B; Berger A
    Aggress Behav; 2013; 39(5):391-404. PubMed ID: 23629691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Mr. right versus Mr. right now: A discounting-based approach to promiscuity.
    Jarmolowicz DP; Lemley SM; Asmussen L; Reed DD
    Behav Processes; 2015 Jun; 115():117-22. PubMed ID: 25804220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Juvenile play conditions sexual partner preference in adult female rats.
    Paredes-Ramos P; Miquel M; Manzo J; Coria-Avila GA
    Physiol Behav; 2011 Oct; 104(5):1016-23. PubMed ID: 21777597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A comparison of preference-assessment methods.
    Verriden AL; Roscoe EM
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2016 Jun; 49(2):265-85. PubMed ID: 27037669
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Using Pictures Depicting App Icons to Conduct an MSWO Preference Assessment on a Tablet Device.
    Hoffmann AN; Brady AM; Paskins RT; Sellers TP
    Behav Anal Pract; 2019 Jun; 12(2):335-342. PubMed ID: 31976239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. STDs among sexually active female college students: does sexual orientation make a difference?
    Lindley LL; Barnett CL; Brandt HM; Hardin JW; Burcin M
    Perspect Sex Reprod Health; 2008 Dec; 40(4):212-7. PubMed ID: 19067934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.