Cited by 21Behavioral and Psychological StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsChild and Animal Learning Development

Effects of delay fading and signals on self‐control choices by children

Open access
Vessells, Julia, Sy, Jolene R., Wilson, Alyssa, Green, Leonard·2018·Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis

Abstract

The current study is a systematic replication and extension of work by Schweitzer & Sulzer‐Azaroff (1988). The effects of delay fading alone and in combination with signals on choices between larger, delayed reinforcers and smaller, immediate reinforcers by four children with language deficits were examined. For one of the two children exposed to delay fading alone, larger reinforcers were selected at longer delays relative to the initial self‐control assessment. For all four children, the delay‐fading‐plus‐signal condition resulted in selection of larger reinforcers at considerably longer delays relative to the self‐control assessment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jaba.454

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Several studies suggest that providing signals or distractors during the delay to the larger-later reward may produce larger reductions in impulsivity.

    “with several studies suggesting larger reductions in impulsivity may be realized by providing signals or distractors during the delay to the LLR (e.g., Newquist, Dozier, & Neidert, 2012; Vessells, Sy, Wilson, & Green, 2018).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. DeLeon, I. G., & Iwata, B. A. (1996). Evaluation of a 50-173 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Dixon, M. R., Hayes, L. J., Binder, L. M., Manthey, S., org/10.1901/jaba.1999.32-451 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vessells, J., Sy, J. R., Wilson, A., & Green, L.
Affiliations
  • Saint Louis University (US)
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore County (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Corresponding author
Sy, Jolene R.
Venue
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-03-14
Volume
51
Issue
2
Pages
374-381
ISSN
  • 0021-8855 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-3703
OpenAlex
W2798217954
Cited by
21
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4
FWCI
4.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Maryland Shared Open Access Repository (USMAI Consortium) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Repository at the University of Maryland (University of Maryland College Park)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
delay discounting, self-control, reinforcement magnitude, signals, replication
MeSH terms
Self-Control, Developmental Disabilities, Child, Preschool, Choice Behavior, Humans, Male, Reinforcement, Psychology, Time Factors, Delay Discounting

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review