192 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8473250)
1. Effects of active student response during error correction on the acquisition, maintenance, and generalization of sight words by students with developmental disabilities.
Barbetta PM; Heron TE; Heward WL
J Appl Behav Anal; 1993; 26(1):111-9. PubMed ID: 8473250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Relative effects of whole-word and phonetic-prompt error correction on the acquisition and maintenance of sight words by students with developmental disabilities.
Barbetta PM; Heward WL; Bradley DM
J Appl Behav Anal; 1993; 26(1):99-110. PubMed ID: 8473263
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effects of immediate and delayed error correction on the acquisition and maintenance of sight words by students with developmental disabilities.
Barbetta PM; Heward WL; Bradley DM; Miller AD
J Appl Behav Anal; 1994; 27(1):177-8. PubMed ID: 8188560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Effects of two error-correction procedures on oral reading errors. Word supply versus sentence repeat.
Singh NN
Behav Modif; 1990 Apr; 14(2):188-99. PubMed ID: 2331242
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of sight word training procedures with validation of the most practical procedure in teaching reading for daily living.
Lalli JS; Browder DM
Res Dev Disabil; 1993; 14(2):107-27. PubMed ID: 8469800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Review of research on sight word instruction.
Browder DM; Lalli JS
Res Dev Disabil; 1991; 12(3):203-28. PubMed ID: 1792355
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Effects of response and trial repetition on sight-word training for students with learning disabilities.
Belfiore PJ; Skinner CH; Ferkis MA
J Appl Behav Anal; 1995; 28(3):347-8. PubMed ID: 7592153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Measurement scale influences in the evaluation of sight-word reading interventions.
Yaw J; Skinner CH; Delisle J; Skinner AL; Maurer K; Cihak D; Wilhoit B; Booher J
J Appl Behav Anal; 2014; 47(2):360-79. PubMed ID: 24763971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Recombinative generalization of within-syllable units in nonreading adults with mental retardation.
Saunders KJ; O'Donnell J; Vaidya M; Williams DC
J Appl Behav Anal; 2003; 36(1):95-9. PubMed ID: 12723870
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Learning rates and known-to-unknown flash-card ratios: comparing effectiveness while holding instructional time constant.
Forbes BE; Skinner CH; Black MP; Yaw J; Booher J; Delisle J
J Appl Behav Anal; 2013 Dec; 46(4):832-7. PubMed ID: 24114395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Using simultaneous prompting to teach sounds and blending skills to students with moderate intellectual disabilities.
Waugh RE; Fredrick LD; Alberto PA
Res Dev Disabil; 2009; 30(6):1435-47. PubMed ID: 19665863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effects of community-based, videotape, and flash card instruction of community-referenced sight words on students with mental retardation.
Cuvo AJ; Klatt KP
J Appl Behav Anal; 1992; 25(2):499-512. PubMed ID: 1378827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Descriptive analysis and comparison of strategic incremental rehearsal to "Business as Usual" sight-word instruction for an adult nonreader with intellectual disability.
Richman DM; Grubb L; Thompson S
Dev Neurorehabil; 2018 Jan; 21(1):23-31. PubMed ID: 27792403
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Teaching Sight Words to Elementary Students With Intellectual Disability and Autism: A Comparison of Teacher-Directed Versus Computer-Assisted Simultaneous Prompting.
Coleman MB; Cherry RA; Moore TC; Park Y; Cihak DF
Intellect Dev Disabil; 2015 Jun; 53(3):196-210. PubMed ID: 26107853
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Analysis of response repetition as an error-correction strategy during sight-word reading.
Worsdell AS; Iwata BA; Dozier CL; Johnson AD; Neidert PL; Thomason JL
J Appl Behav Anal; 2005; 38(4):511-27. PubMed ID: 16463531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Impact of time delay, observational learning, and attentional cuing upon word recognition during integrated small-group instruction.
Schoen SF; Ogden S
J Autism Dev Disord; 1995 Oct; 25(5):503-19. PubMed ID: 8567596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of constant time delay and the system of least prompts in teaching preschoolers with developmental delays.
Doyle PM; Wolery M; Gast DL; Ault MJ; Wiley K
Res Dev Disabil; 1990; 11(1):1-22. PubMed ID: 1689069
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Enhancing the spelling performance of learning disabled students. Task variation does not increase the efficacy of directed rehearsal.
Singh NN; Farquhar S; Hewett AE
Behav Modif; 1991 Apr; 15(2):271-82. PubMed ID: 2039435
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of phonological and whole-word treatments for two contrasting cases of developmental dyslexia.
Rouse HJ; Wilshire CE
Cogn Neuropsychol; 2007 Dec; 24(8):817-42. PubMed ID: 18277451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effects of error correction during assessment probes on the acquisition of sight words for students with moderate intellectual disabilities.
Waugh RE; Alberto PA; Fredrick LD
Res Dev Disabil; 2011; 32(1):47-57. PubMed ID: 20884169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
