The DOI matches its Crossref record.
EVALUATION OF A MULTIPLE‐STIMULUS PRESENTATION FORMAT FOR ASSESSING REINFORCER PREFERENCES
Open accessAbstract
We compared three methods for presenting stimuli during reinforcer‐preference assessments: a paired‐stimulus format (PS), a multiple‐stimulus format in which selections were made with replacement (MSW), and a multiple‐stimulus format in which selections were made without replacement (MSWO). Results obtained for 7 participants showed moderate to high rank‐order correlations between the MSWO and PS procedures and a similar number of identified reinforcers. In addition, the time to administer the MSWO procedure was comparable to that required for the MSW method and less than half that required to administer the PS procedure. Subsequent tests of reinforcement effects revealed that some stimuli selected in the PS and MSWO procedures, but not selected in the MSW procedure, functioned as reinforcers for arbitrary responses. These preliminary results suggest that the multiple‐stimulus procedure without replacement may share the respective advantages of the other methods.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
EVALUATION OF A BRIEF STIMULUS PREFERENCE ASSESSMENT
Roane, H. S., Vollmer, T. R., Ringdahl, J. E., & Marcus, B. A. (1998) · Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis · doi:10.1901/jaba.1998.31-605 · Cited by 468
EVALUATION OF A BRIEF MULTIPLE‐STIMULUS PREFERENCE ASSESSMENT IN A NATURALISTIC CONTEXT
Carr, J. E., Nicolson, A. C., & Higbee, T. S. (2000) · Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis · doi:10.1901/jaba.2000.33-353 · Cited by 405
Nigro‐Bruzzi, D., & Sturmey, P. (2010) · Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis · doi:10.1901/jaba.2010.43-757 · Cited by 143
Newcomb, E. T., & Hagopian, L. P. (2018) · International Review of Psychiatry · doi:10.1080/09540261.2018.1435513 · Cited by 119
FURTHER EVALUATION OF A BRIEF, INTENSIVE TEACHER‐TRAINING MODEL
Lerman, D. C., Tetreault, A., Hovanetz, A., Strobel, M., & Garro, J. (2008) · Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis · doi:10.1901/jaba.2008.41-243 · Cited by 102
Metadata
- Authors
- DeLeon, I. G., & Iwata, B. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1996-12
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 519-533
- ISSN
- 0021-8855 (ISSN-L)
- 1938-3703
- OpenAlex
- W2139777648
- Cited by
- 1,328
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: EVALUATION OF A MULTIPLE‐STIMULUS PRESENTATION FORMAT FOR ASSESSING REINFORCER PREFERENCES. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1901/jaba.1996.29-519
- The paper
- DeLeon, I. G., & Iwata, B. A. (1996). EVALUATION OF A MULTIPLE‐STIMULUS PRESENTATION FORMAT FOR ASSESSING REINFORCER PREFERENCES. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1996.29-519
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
