Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 212

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

AN EVALUATION OF PERSISTENCE OF TREATMENT EFFECTS DURING LONG‐TERM TREATMENT OF DESTRUCTIVE BEHAVIOR

Open access
Wacker, David P., Harding, Jay W., Berg, Wendy K., Lee, John F., Schieltz, Kelly M., Padilla, Yaniz C., Nevin, John A., Shahan, Timothy A.·2011·Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

Abstract

Eight young children who displayed destructive behavior maintained, at least in part, by negative reinforcement received long‐term functional communication training (FCT). During FCT, the children completed a portion of a task and then touched a communication card attached to a microswitch to obtain brief breaks. Prior to and intermittently throughout FCT, extinction probes were conducted within a withdrawal design in which task completion, manding, and destructive behavior were placed on extinction to evaluate the relative persistence of appropriate and destructive behavior over the course of treatment. FCT continued until appropriate behavior persisted and destructive behavior failed to recur at baseline levels during extinction probes. The completion of FCT was followed by four challenges to the persistence of treatment effects conducted within mixed‐ or multiple‐schedule designs: (a) extended extinction sessions (from 5 to 15 min), (b) introduction of a novel task, (c) removal of the microswitch and communication card, and (d) a mixed schedule of reinforcement in which both appropriate and destructive behavior produced reinforcement. The results showed that although FCT often resulted in quick reductions in destructive behavior and increases in appropriate behavior, destructive behavior often recurred during the extinction probes conducted during the initial treatment. When the effects of treatment persisted during the extinction probes, the remaining challenges to treatment effects resulted in only mild to moderate disruptions in behavior. These results are consistent with the quantitative predictions of behavioral momentum theory and may provide an alternative definition of maintenance as constituting behavioral persistence.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1901/jeab.2011.96-261

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 212

Metadata

Authors
Wacker, D. P., Harding, J. W., Berg, W. K., Lee, J. F., Schieltz, K. M., Padilla, Y. C., Nevin, J. A., & Shahan, T. A.
Venue
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-09
Volume
96
Issue
2
Pages
261-282
ISSN
  • 0022-5002 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-3711
OpenAlex
W2116000083
Cited by
212
References
2
FWCI
14.83
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: AN EVALUATION OF PERSISTENCE OF TREATMENT EFFECTS DURING LONG‐TERM TREATMENT OF DESTRUCTIVE BEHAVIOR. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1901/jeab.2011.96-261
The paper
Wacker, D. P., Harding, J. W., Berg, W. K., Lee, J. F., Schieltz, K. M., Padilla, Y. C., Nevin, J. A., & Shahan, T. A. (2011). AN EVALUATION OF PERSISTENCE OF TREATMENT EFFECTS DURING LONG‐TERM TREATMENT OF DESTRUCTIVE BEHAVIOR. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2011.96-261

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.