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

195 related items for PubMed ID: 3701262

  • 1. Fixed and variable ratios and delays: further tests of an equivalence rule.
    Mazur JE.
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 1986 Apr; 12(2):116-24. PubMed ID: 3701262
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Probability and delay of reinforcement as factors in discrete-trial choice.
    Mazur JE.
    J Exp Anal Behav; 1985 May; 43(3):341-51. PubMed ID: 4020322
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. A comparison of delays and ratio requirements in self-control choice.
    Grossbard CL, Mazur JE.
    J Exp Anal Behav; 1986 May; 45(3):305-15. PubMed ID: 3711777
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Choice between delayed reinforcers and fixed-ratio schedules requiring forceful responding.
    Mazur JE, Kralik JD.
    J Exp Anal Behav; 1990 Jan; 53(1):175-87. PubMed ID: 2299287
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Pigeons' choices in situations of diminishing returns: fixed- versus progressive-ratio schedules.
    Wanchisen BA, Tatham TA, Hineline PN.
    J Exp Anal Behav; 1988 Nov; 50(3):375-94. PubMed ID: 3209955
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. On the joint control of preference by time and reinforcer-ratio variation.
    Davison M, Cowie S, Elliffe D.
    Behav Processes; 2013 May; 95():100-12. PubMed ID: 23410902
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Control of pigeons' matching-to-sample performance by differential sample response requirements.
    Hogan DE, Zentall TR, Pace G.
    Am J Psychol; 1983 May; 96(1):37-49. PubMed ID: 6859346
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 13. Human choice in "counterintuitive" situations: fixed- versus progressive-ratio schedules.
    Wanchisen BA, Tatham TA, Hineline PN.
    J Exp Anal Behav; 1992 Jul; 58(1):67-85. PubMed ID: 1645102
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Adjusting delay to reinforcement: comparing choice in pigeons and humans.
    Rodriguez ML, Logue AW.
    J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process; 1988 Jan; 14(1):105-17. PubMed ID: 3351438
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Response allocation in a rapid-acquisition concurrent-chains procedure: effects of overall terminal-link duration.
    Christensen DR, Grace RC.
    Behav Processes; 2009 Jun; 81(2):233-7. PubMed ID: 19429217
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Estimation of indifference points with an adjusting-delay procedure.
    Mazur JE.
    J Exp Anal Behav; 1988 Jan; 49(1):37-47. PubMed ID: 3346621
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Molar optimization versus delayed reinforcement as explanations of choice between fixed-ratio and progressive-ratio schedules.
    Mazur JE, Vaughan W.
    J Exp Anal Behav; 1987 Sep; 48(2):251-61. PubMed ID: 3681185
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Effects of timeout on a discrimination between fixed-ratio schedules.
    Rilling M.
    J Exp Anal Behav; 1968 Mar; 11(2):129-32. PubMed ID: 5645868
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 10.