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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

316 related items for PubMed ID: 10641302

  • 1. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Emergence of reinforcer preference as a function of schedule requirements and stimulus similarity.
    DeLeon IG, Iwata BA, Goh HL, Worsdell AS.
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1997; 30(3):439-49. PubMed ID: 9378681
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. On the relative reinforcing effects of choice and differential consequences.
    Fisher WW, Thompson RH, Piazza CC, Crosland K, Gotjen D.
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1997; 30(3):423-38. PubMed ID: 9316257
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. On the displacement of leisure items by food during multiple-stimulus preference assessments.
    Bojak SL, Carr JE.
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1999; 32(4):515-8. PubMed ID: 10641304
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Assessment of preference for varied versus constant reinforcers.
    Bowman LG, Piazza CC, Fisher WW, Hagopian LP, Kogan JS.
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1997; 30(3):451-8. PubMed ID: 9316258
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Using a choice assessment to predict reinforcer effectiveness.
    Piazza CC, Fisher WW, Hagopian LP, Bowman LG, Toole L.
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1996; 29(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 8881340
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. An evaluation of the effects of matched stimuli on behaviors maintained by automatic reinforcement.
    Piazza CC, Adelinis JD, Hanley GP, Goh HL, Delia MD.
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2000; 33(1):13-27. PubMed ID: 10738949
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Evaluation of absolute and relative reinforcer value using progressive-ratio schedules.
    Francisco MT, Borrero JC, Sy JR.
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2008; 41(2):189-202. PubMed ID: 18595283
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Preference for reinforcers under progressive- and fixed-ratio schedules: a comparison of single and concurrent arrangements.
    Glover AC, Roane HS, Kadey HJ, Grow LL.
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2008; 41(2):163-76. PubMed ID: 18595281
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Displacement of leisure reinforcers by food during preference assessments.
    DeLeon IG, Iwata BA, Roscoe EM.
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1997; 30(3):475-84. PubMed ID: 9316260
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Evaluating the predictive validity of a single stimulus engagement preference assessment.
    Hagopian LP, Rush KS, Lewin AB, Long ES.
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2001; 34(4):475-85. PubMed ID: 11800186
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Using pictures to assess reinforcers in individuals with developmental disabilities.
    Graff RB, Gibson L.
    Behav Modif; 2003 Sep; 27(4):470-83. PubMed ID: 12971123
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 16.