Evaluating the influence of postsession reinforcement on choice of reinforcers

Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis

Volumn 40, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 515-527

  Kodak, Tiffany ^a   Lerman, Dorothea C ^b,d   Call, Nathan ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON   (United States)

^c Marcus Institute   (United States)

^d Box 245 ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Behavioral economics; Choice; Postsession reinforcement; Substitutability

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; MALE; PRESCHOOL CHILD; REINFORCEMENT;

CHILD, PRESCHOOL; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; HUMANS; MALE; REINFORCEMENT (PSYCHOLOGY); TOKEN ECONOMY;

EID: 38449117986     PISSN: 00218855     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2007.40-515     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. DeLeon, I. G., Iwata, B. A., Goh, H., & Worsdell, A. S. (1997). Emergence of reinforcer preference as a function of schedule requirements and stimulus similarity. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 439-449.
2. Fisher, W., Piazza, C. C., Bowman, L. G., Hagopian, L. P., Owens, J. C., & Slevin, I. (1992). A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 491-498.
3. Green, L., & Freed, D. E. (1993). The substitutability of reinforcers. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 60, 141-158.
4. Herrnstein, R. J. (1961). Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 267-272.
5. Hursh, S. R. (1978). The economics of daily consumption controlling food- and water-reinforced responding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 29, 475-491.
6. Hursh, S. R. (1980). Economic concepts for the analysis of behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 34, 219-238.
7. Hursh, S. R. (1984). Behavioral economics. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 42, 435-452.
8. Kagel, J. H., Battalio, R. C., Rachlin, R., Green, L., Basmann, R. L., & Klemm, W. R. (1975). Experimental studies on consumer demand behavior using laboratory animals. Economic Inquiry, 13, 22-38.
9. Ladewig, J., Sørensen, D. B., Nielsen, P. P., & Matthews, L. R. (2002). The quantitative measurement of motivation: Generation of demand functions under open versus closed economies. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 79, 325-331.
10. Lalli, J. S., Vollmer, T. R., Progar, P. R., Wright, C., Borrero, J., Daniel, D., et al. (1999). Competition between positive and negative reinforcement in the treatment of escape behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 285-296.
11. Lea, S. E. G., & Roper, T. J. (1977). Demand for food on fixed-ratio schedules as a function of the quality of concurrently available reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 27, 371-380.
12. Lerman, D. C. (2003). From the laboratory to community application: Translational research in behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 415-419.
13. Neef, N. A., Mace, F. C., Shea, M. C., & Shade, D. (1992). Effects of reinforcer rate and reinforcer quality on time allocation: Extensions of matching theory to educational settings. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 691-699.
14. Roane, H. S., Call, N. A., & Falcomata, T. S. (2005). A preliminary analysis of adaptive responding under open and closed economies. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38, 335-348.
15. Roane, H. S., Lerman, D. C., & Vorndran, C. M. (2001). Assessing reinforcers under progressive schedule requirements. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34, 145-167.
16. Shore, B. A., Iwata, B. A., DeLeon, I. G., Kahng, S., & Smith, R. G. (1997). An analysis of reinforcer substitutability using object manipulation and self-injury as competing responses. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 21-41.
17. Tustin, R. D. (1994). Preference for reinforcers under varying schedule arrangements: A behavioral economic analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 597-606.
18. Zeiler, M. D. (1999). Reversed schedule effects in closed and open economies. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71, 171-186.
19. Zhou, L., Goff, G. A., & Iwata, B. A. (2000). Effects of increased response effort on self-injury and object manipulation as competing responses. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33, 29-40.