The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
EVALUATION OF CLIENT PREFERENCE FOR FUNCTION‐BASED TREATMENT PACKAGES
Open accessAbstract
Functional communication training (FCT) and noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) are commonly prescribed treatments that are based on the results of a functional analysis. Both treatments involve delivery of the reinforcer that is responsible for the maintenance of destructive behavior. One major difference between the two treatment procedures is that client responding determines reinforcement delivery with FCT (e.g., reinforcement of communication is delivered on a fixed‐ratio 1 schedule) but not with NCR (e.g., reinforcement is delivered on a fixed‐time 30‐s schedule). In the current investigation, FCT and NCR were equally effective in reducing 2 participants' destructive behavior that was sensitive to attention as reinforcement. After the treatment analysis, the participants' relative preference for each treatment was evaluated using a modified concurrent‐chains procedure. Both participants demonstrated a preference for the FCT procedure. The results are discussed in terms of treatment efficacy and preference for control over when reinforcement is delivered. In addition, a method is demonstrated in which clients with developmental disabilities can participate in selecting treatments that are designed to reduce their destructive behavior.
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
Cites
Toward a functional analysis of self-injury
Iwata, B. A., Dorsey, M. F., Slifer, K. J., Bauman, K. E., & Richman, G. S. (1994) · Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis · doi:10.1901/jaba.1994.27-197 · Cited by 2,644
ESTABLISHING OPERATIONS AND REINFORCEMENT EFFECTS
Vollmer, T. R., & Iwata, B. A. (1991) · Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis · doi:10.1901/jaba.1991.24-279 · Cited by 187
Cited by
Functional Communication Training: A Review and Practical Guide
Tiger, J. H., Hanley, G. P., & Bruzek, J. (2008) · Behavior Analysis in Practice · doi:10.1007/bf03391716 · Cited by 532
Self-citationFacilitating Tolerance of Delayed Reinforcement During Functional Communication Training
Fisher, W. W., Thompson, R. H., Hagopian, L. P., Bowman, L. G., & Krug, A. (2000) · Behavior Modification · doi:10.1177/0145445500241001 · Cited by 171
Self-citationAN EVALUATION OF THE VALUE OF CHOICE WITH PRESCHOOL CHILDREN
Tiger, J. H., Hanley, G. P., & Hernandez, E. (2006) · Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis · doi:10.1901/jaba.2006.158-04 · Cited by 119
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Hanley, G. P., Piazza, C. C., Fisher, W. W., Contrucci, S. A., & Maglieri, K. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1997-09
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 459-473
- ISSN
- 0021-8855 (ISSN-L)
- 1938-3703
- OpenAlex
- W2145962539
- Cited by
- 222
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 11.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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 CLIENT PREFERENCE FOR FUNCTION‐BASED TREATMENT PACKAGES. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1901/jaba.1997.30-459
- The paper
- Hanley, G. P., Piazza, C. C., Fisher, W. W., Contrucci, S. A., & Maglieri, K. A. (1997). EVALUATION OF CLIENT PREFERENCE FOR FUNCTION‐BASED TREATMENT PACKAGES. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1997.30-459
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.