258 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8682733)
1. A preliminary procedure for predicting the positive and negative effects of reinforcement-based procedures.
Piazza CC; Fisher WW; Hanley GP; Hilker K; Derby KM
J Appl Behav Anal; 1996; 29(2):137-52. PubMed ID: 8682733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Relative versus absolute reinforcement effects: implications for preference assessments.
Roscoe EM; Iwata BA; Kahng S
J Appl Behav Anal; 1999; 32(4):479-93. PubMed ID: 10641302
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Analysis of the reinforcement and extinction components in DRO contingencies with self-injury.
Mazaleski JL; Iwata BA; Vollmer TR; Zarcone JR; Smith RG
J Appl Behav Anal; 1993; 26(2):143-56. PubMed ID: 8331012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The effects of noncontingent delivery of high- and low-preference stimuli on attention-maintained destructive behavior.
Fisher WW; O'Connor JT; Kurtz PF; DeLeon IG; Gotjen DL
J Appl Behav Anal; 2000; 33(1):79-83. PubMed ID: 10738954
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Empirically derived consequences: a data-based method for prescribing treatments for destructive behavior.
Fisher W; Piazza CC; Bowman LG; Hagopian LP; Langdon NA
Res Dev Disabil; 1994; 15(2):133-49. PubMed ID: 8085030
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The effects of noncontingent access to food on the rate of object mouthing across three settings.
Roane HS; Kelly ML; Fisher WW
J Appl Behav Anal; 2003; 36(4):579-82. PubMed ID: 14768675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Further examination of factors that influence preference for positive versus negative reinforcement.
Kodak T; Lerman DC; Volkert VM; Trosclair N
J Appl Behav Anal; 2007; 40(1):25-44. PubMed ID: 17471792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The effect of noncontingent sensory reinforcement, contingent sensory reinforcement, and response interruption on stereotypical and self-injurious behavior.
Sprague J; Holland K; Thomas K
Res Dev Disabil; 1997; 18(1):61-77. PubMed ID: 9085430
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. An analysis of reinforcer substitutability using object manipulation and self-injury as competing responses.
Shore BA; Iwata BA; DeLeon IG; Kahng S; Smith RG
J Appl Behav Anal; 1997; 30(1):21-41. PubMed ID: 9103985
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Responding maintained by intermittent reinforcement: implications for the use of extinction with problem behavior in clinical settings.
Lerman DC; Iwata BA; Shore BA; Kahng SW
J Appl Behav Anal; 1996; 29(2):153-71. PubMed ID: 8682734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities.
Fisher W; Piazza CC; Bowman LG; Hagopian LP; Owens JC; Slevin I
J Appl Behav Anal; 1992; 25(2):491-8. PubMed ID: 1634435
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Noncontingent reinforcement as treatment for severe problem behavior: some procedural variations.
Lalli JS; Casey SD; Kates K
J Appl Behav Anal; 1997; 30(1):127-36; quiz 136-7. PubMed ID: 9103988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Direct and collateral effects of restraints and restraint fading.
Fisher WW; Piazza CC; Bowman LG; Hanley GP; Adelinis JD
J Appl Behav Anal; 1997; 30(1):105-19; quiz 120. PubMed ID: 9103987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The treatment of covert self-injury through contingencies on response products.
Grace NC; Thompson R; Fisher WW
J Appl Behav Anal; 1996; 29(2):239-42. PubMed ID: 8682739
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A brief method for conducting a negative-reinforcement assessment.
Zarcone JR; Crosland K; Fisher WW; Worsdell AS; Herman K
Res Dev Disabil; 1999; 20(2):107-24. PubMed ID: 10198942
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Treatment and extended follow-up of chronic hand mouthing.
Lockwood K; Williams DE
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry; 1994 Jun; 25(2):161-9. PubMed ID: 7983228
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The role of attention in the treatment of attention-maintained self-injurious behavior: noncontingent reinforcement and differential reinforcement of other behavior.
Vollmer TR; Iwata BA; Zarcone JR; Smith RG; Mazaleski JL
J Appl Behav Anal; 1993; 26(1):9-21. PubMed ID: 8473262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Stimulus control and resistance to extinction in attention-maintained SIB.
Hanley GP; Piazza CC; Fisher WW; Adelinis JD
Res Dev Disabil; 1997; 18(4):251-60. PubMed ID: 9216025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Reducing stereotyped behaviour: a comparison of two methods of programming differential reinforcement.
Miller BY; Jones RS
Br J Clin Psychol; 1997 May; 36(2):297-302. PubMed ID: 9167870
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effects of reinforcement choice on task responding in individuals with developmental disabilities.
Lerman DC; Iwata BA; Rainville B; Adelinis JD; Crosland K; Kogan J
J Appl Behav Anal; 1997; 30(3):411-22. PubMed ID: 9316256
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
