PREFERENCE FOR REINFORCERS UNDER PROGRESSIVE- AND FIXED-RATIO SCHEDULES: A COMPARISON OF SINGLE AND CONCURRENT ARRANGEMENTS

Progressive‐ratio (PR) schedules were used to identify the break point (i.e., the last schedule value completed) for 2 reinforcers under single and concurrent schedules. After the respective break points were established, the same reinforcers were presented under concurrent fixed‐ratio (FR) schedule...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of applied behavior analysis 2008, Vol.41 (2), p.163-176
Main Authors: Glover, Ashley C., Roane, Henry S., Kadey, Heather J., Grow, Laura L.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adolescent
Aggression - psychology
Autism
Autistic Disorder - psychology
Autistic Disorder - therapy
Behavior Disorders
Behavior Modification
Behavior Therapy - methods
Child
Choice Behavior
concurrent schedules
Counseling Techniques
Developmental disabilities
Experiments
fixed ratio
Humans
Intellectual disabilities
Intellectual Disability - psychology
Intellectual Disability - therapy
Investigations
Male
Mental Retardation
Motivation
Outcomes of Treatment
Positive Reinforcement
Preferences
progressive ratio
Reinforcement Schedule
Response rates
Responses
Schedules
Scheduling
Social Behavior Disorders - psychology
Social Behavior Disorders - therapy
Social Environment
Stimuli
Token Economy
Treatment Outcome
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5278-b5cde5e467edeae05474dac05d6c9568bc8b6b023c2a64c2fb1625211c8077243
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5278-b5cde5e467edeae05474dac05d6c9568bc8b6b023c2a64c2fb1625211c8077243
container_end_page 176
container_issue 2
container_start_page 163
container_title Journal of applied behavior analysis
container_volume 41
creator Glover, Ashley C.
Roane, Henry S.
Kadey, Heather J.
Grow, Laura L.
description Progressive‐ratio (PR) schedules were used to identify the break point (i.e., the last schedule value completed) for 2 reinforcers under single and concurrent schedules. After the respective break points were established, the same reinforcers were presented under concurrent fixed‐ratio (FR) schedules that were yoked to the break points obtained with the PR schedules. Results suggested that the participants responded more for the high‐preference item than for the low‐preference item, regardless of the presentation arrangement (single or concurrent presentations). This pattern of responding was maintained when the reinforcers were presented under dissimilar FR schedules. The results suggest that responding for differentially preferred stimuli may vary as a function of differences in schedule requirements.
doi_str_mv 10.1901/jaba.2008.41-163
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2408352</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ798588</ericid><sourcerecordid>1507300681</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5278-b5cde5e467edeae05474dac05d6c9568bc8b6b023c2a64c2fb1625211c8077243</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc2P0zAQxSMEYsvCnQNCFgduKbZjOw4HpGzqdrN0k-K0wM1yHHdJaZslaYEV_zwOrcrHhdOMNL_3ZkbP854iOEQRRK9WutRDDCEfEuQjFtzzBigKuB-EMLjvDSDEyOec0jPvUdetIEQYMvrQO0OcRhRzNPB-zKQYCymyRIBxLoEUaeZqImQBFtlISDCT-USKokjfCx_E2QiM049i5Mt4nuagSC7FaDEVxWsQgyS_nsUyLfIM5GNQpNlkKn4pkjxLFtItmYNYyjibiGvXF4-9B0u97uyTYz33FmMxTy79aT5Jk3jqG4pD7pfUVJZawkJbWW0hJSGptIG0YiaijJeGl6yEODBYM2LwskQMU4yQ4TAMMQnOvTcH39t9ubGVsdtdq9fqtq03ur1Tja7V35Nt_UndNF8VJpAHFDuDZwcD29bmpBNXYcQp52788ujfNl_2ttupTd0Zu17rrW32nWIR5jhiPfjiH3DV7Nut-11hTCEhFDIHwQNk2qbrWrs8LURQ9amrPnXVp64IUi51J3n-54O_BceYHcAOwLd6be_-a6iu4osY0ai_2D8I625nv5-Euv2sWBiEVH3IJopnF29DUrxTs-Annje9qw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>225044506</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>PREFERENCE FOR REINFORCERS UNDER PROGRESSIVE- AND FIXED-RATIO SCHEDULES: A COMPARISON OF SINGLE AND CONCURRENT ARRANGEMENTS</title><source>Criminology Collection</source><source>ABI/INFORM global</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection</source><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read &amp; Publish Collection</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Education Collection</source><creator>Glover, Ashley C. ; Roane, Henry S. ; Kadey, Heather J. ; Grow, Laura L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Glover, Ashley C. ; Roane, Henry S. ; Kadey, Heather J. ; Grow, Laura L.</creatorcontrib><description>Progressive‐ratio (PR) schedules were used to identify the break point (i.e., the last schedule value completed) for 2 reinforcers under single and concurrent schedules. After the respective break points were established, the same reinforcers were presented under concurrent fixed‐ratio (FR) schedules that were yoked to the break points obtained with the PR schedules. Results suggested that the participants responded more for the high‐preference item than for the low‐preference item, regardless of the presentation arrangement (single or concurrent presentations). This pattern of responding was maintained when the reinforcers were presented under dissimilar FR schedules. The results suggest that responding for differentially preferred stimuli may vary as a function of differences in schedule requirements.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8855</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-3703</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2008.41-163</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18595281</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JOABAW</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Aggression - psychology ; Autism ; Autistic Disorder - psychology ; Autistic Disorder - therapy ; Behavior Disorders ; Behavior Modification ; Behavior Therapy - methods ; Child ; Choice Behavior ; concurrent schedules ; Counseling Techniques ; Developmental disabilities ; Experiments ; fixed ratio ; Humans ; Intellectual disabilities ; Intellectual Disability - psychology ; Intellectual Disability - therapy ; Investigations ; Male ; Mental Retardation ; Motivation ; Outcomes of Treatment ; Positive Reinforcement ; Preferences ; progressive ratio ; Reinforcement Schedule ; Response rates ; Responses ; Schedules ; Scheduling ; Social Behavior Disorders - psychology ; Social Behavior Disorders - therapy ; Social Environment ; Stimuli ; Token Economy ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Journal of applied behavior analysis, 2008, Vol.41 (2), p.163-176</ispartof><rights>2008 Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior</rights><rights>Copyright Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior Summer 2008</rights><rights>Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, Inc. 2008</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5278-b5cde5e467edeae05474dac05d6c9568bc8b6b023c2a64c2fb1625211c8077243</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5278-b5cde5e467edeae05474dac05d6c9568bc8b6b023c2a64c2fb1625211c8077243</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/225044506/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/225044506?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,11667,21355,21357,21373,27901,27902,33588,33589,33746,33747,33854,33855,36037,36038,43709,43790,43856,44339,53766,53768,73964,74053,74140,74638</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18595281$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ798588$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Glover, Ashley C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roane, Henry S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kadey, Heather J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grow, Laura L.</creatorcontrib><title>PREFERENCE FOR REINFORCERS UNDER PROGRESSIVE- AND FIXED-RATIO SCHEDULES: A COMPARISON OF SINGLE AND CONCURRENT ARRANGEMENTS</title><title>Journal of applied behavior analysis</title><addtitle>J Appl Behav Anal</addtitle><description>Progressive‐ratio (PR) schedules were used to identify the break point (i.e., the last schedule value completed) for 2 reinforcers under single and concurrent schedules. After the respective break points were established, the same reinforcers were presented under concurrent fixed‐ratio (FR) schedules that were yoked to the break points obtained with the PR schedules. Results suggested that the participants responded more for the high‐preference item than for the low‐preference item, regardless of the presentation arrangement (single or concurrent presentations). This pattern of responding was maintained when the reinforcers were presented under dissimilar FR schedules. The results suggest that responding for differentially preferred stimuli may vary as a function of differences in schedule requirements.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Aggression - psychology</subject><subject>Autism</subject><subject>Autistic Disorder - psychology</subject><subject>Autistic Disorder - therapy</subject><subject>Behavior Disorders</subject><subject>Behavior Modification</subject><subject>Behavior Therapy - methods</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Choice Behavior</subject><subject>concurrent schedules</subject><subject>Counseling Techniques</subject><subject>Developmental disabilities</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>fixed ratio</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intellectual disabilities</subject><subject>Intellectual Disability - psychology</subject><subject>Intellectual Disability - therapy</subject><subject>Investigations</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Mental Retardation</subject><subject>Motivation</subject><subject>Outcomes of Treatment</subject><subject>Positive Reinforcement</subject><subject>Preferences</subject><subject>progressive ratio</subject><subject>Reinforcement Schedule</subject><subject>Response rates</subject><subject>Responses</subject><subject>Schedules</subject><subject>Scheduling</subject><subject>Social Behavior Disorders - psychology</subject><subject>Social Behavior Disorders - therapy</subject><subject>Social Environment</subject><subject>Stimuli</subject><subject>Token Economy</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0021-8855</issn><issn>1938-3703</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>BGRYB</sourceid><sourceid>CJNVE</sourceid><sourceid>M0C</sourceid><sourceid>M0O</sourceid><sourceid>M0P</sourceid><sourceid>M2R</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc2P0zAQxSMEYsvCnQNCFgduKbZjOw4HpGzqdrN0k-K0wM1yHHdJaZslaYEV_zwOrcrHhdOMNL_3ZkbP854iOEQRRK9WutRDDCEfEuQjFtzzBigKuB-EMLjvDSDEyOec0jPvUdetIEQYMvrQO0OcRhRzNPB-zKQYCymyRIBxLoEUaeZqImQBFtlISDCT-USKokjfCx_E2QiM049i5Mt4nuagSC7FaDEVxWsQgyS_nsUyLfIM5GNQpNlkKn4pkjxLFtItmYNYyjibiGvXF4-9B0u97uyTYz33FmMxTy79aT5Jk3jqG4pD7pfUVJZawkJbWW0hJSGptIG0YiaijJeGl6yEODBYM2LwskQMU4yQ4TAMMQnOvTcH39t9ubGVsdtdq9fqtq03ur1Tja7V35Nt_UndNF8VJpAHFDuDZwcD29bmpBNXYcQp52788ujfNl_2ttupTd0Zu17rrW32nWIR5jhiPfjiH3DV7Nut-11hTCEhFDIHwQNk2qbrWrs8LURQ9amrPnXVp64IUi51J3n-54O_BceYHcAOwLd6be_-a6iu4osY0ai_2D8I625nv5-Euv2sWBiEVH3IJopnF29DUrxTs-Annje9qw</recordid><startdate>2008</startdate><enddate>2008</enddate><creator>Glover, Ashley C.</creator><creator>Roane, Henry S.</creator><creator>Kadey, Heather J.</creator><creator>Grow, Laura L.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior</general><general>The Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8A4</scope><scope>8AM</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGRYB</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0O</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>PYYUZ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>GA5</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2008</creationdate><title>PREFERENCE FOR REINFORCERS UNDER PROGRESSIVE- AND FIXED-RATIO SCHEDULES: A COMPARISON OF SINGLE AND CONCURRENT ARRANGEMENTS</title><author>Glover, Ashley C. ; Roane, Henry S. ; Kadey, Heather J. ; Grow, Laura L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5278-b5cde5e467edeae05474dac05d6c9568bc8b6b023c2a64c2fb1625211c8077243</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Aggression - psychology</topic><topic>Autism</topic><topic>Autistic Disorder - psychology</topic><topic>Autistic Disorder - therapy</topic><topic>Behavior Disorders</topic><topic>Behavior Modification</topic><topic>Behavior Therapy - methods</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Choice Behavior</topic><topic>concurrent schedules</topic><topic>Counseling Techniques</topic><topic>Developmental disabilities</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>fixed ratio</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intellectual disabilities</topic><topic>Intellectual Disability - psychology</topic><topic>Intellectual Disability - therapy</topic><topic>Investigations</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Mental Retardation</topic><topic>Motivation</topic><topic>Outcomes of Treatment</topic><topic>Positive Reinforcement</topic><topic>Preferences</topic><topic>progressive ratio</topic><topic>Reinforcement Schedule</topic><topic>Response rates</topic><topic>Responses</topic><topic>Schedules</topic><topic>Scheduling</topic><topic>Social Behavior Disorders - psychology</topic><topic>Social Behavior Disorders - therapy</topic><topic>Social Environment</topic><topic>Stimuli</topic><topic>Token Economy</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Glover, Ashley C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roane, Henry S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kadey, Heather J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grow, Laura L.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>Global News &amp; ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Proquest)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Periodicals</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Criminology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM global</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Education Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC - Full Text Only (Discovery)</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of applied behavior analysis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Glover, Ashley C.</au><au>Roane, Henry S.</au><au>Kadey, Heather J.</au><au>Grow, Laura L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ798588</ericid><atitle>PREFERENCE FOR REINFORCERS UNDER PROGRESSIVE- AND FIXED-RATIO SCHEDULES: A COMPARISON OF SINGLE AND CONCURRENT ARRANGEMENTS</atitle><jtitle>Journal of applied behavior analysis</jtitle><addtitle>J Appl Behav Anal</addtitle><date>2008</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>163</spage><epage>176</epage><pages>163-176</pages><issn>0021-8855</issn><eissn>1938-3703</eissn><coden>JOABAW</coden><abstract>Progressive‐ratio (PR) schedules were used to identify the break point (i.e., the last schedule value completed) for 2 reinforcers under single and concurrent schedules. After the respective break points were established, the same reinforcers were presented under concurrent fixed‐ratio (FR) schedules that were yoked to the break points obtained with the PR schedules. Results suggested that the participants responded more for the high‐preference item than for the low‐preference item, regardless of the presentation arrangement (single or concurrent presentations). This pattern of responding was maintained when the reinforcers were presented under dissimilar FR schedules. The results suggest that responding for differentially preferred stimuli may vary as a function of differences in schedule requirements.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>18595281</pmid><doi>10.1901/jaba.2008.41-163</doi><tpages>14</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0021-8855
ispartof Journal of applied behavior analysis, 2008, Vol.41 (2), p.163-176
issn 0021-8855
1938-3703
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2408352
source Criminology Collection; ABI/INFORM global; Social Science Premium Collection; Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection; PubMed Central; Education Collection
subjects Adolescent
Aggression - psychology
Autism
Autistic Disorder - psychology
Autistic Disorder - therapy
Behavior Disorders
Behavior Modification
Behavior Therapy - methods
Child
Choice Behavior
concurrent schedules
Counseling Techniques
Developmental disabilities
Experiments
fixed ratio
Humans
Intellectual disabilities
Intellectual Disability - psychology
Intellectual Disability - therapy
Investigations
Male
Mental Retardation
Motivation
Outcomes of Treatment
Positive Reinforcement
Preferences
progressive ratio
Reinforcement Schedule
Response rates
Responses
Schedules
Scheduling
Social Behavior Disorders - psychology
Social Behavior Disorders - therapy
Social Environment
Stimuli
Token Economy
Treatment Outcome
title PREFERENCE FOR REINFORCERS UNDER PROGRESSIVE- AND FIXED-RATIO SCHEDULES: A COMPARISON OF SINGLE AND CONCURRENT ARRANGEMENTS
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-06T00%3A01%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=PREFERENCE%20FOR%20REINFORCERS%20UNDER%20PROGRESSIVE-%20AND%20FIXED-RATIO%20SCHEDULES:%20A%20COMPARISON%20OF%20SINGLE%20AND%20CONCURRENT%20ARRANGEMENTS&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20applied%20behavior%20analysis&rft.au=Glover,%20Ashley%20C.&rft.date=2008&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=163&rft.epage=176&rft.pages=163-176&rft.issn=0021-8855&rft.eissn=1938-3703&rft.coden=JOABAW&rft_id=info:doi/10.1901/jaba.2008.41-163&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1507300681%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5278-b5cde5e467edeae05474dac05d6c9568bc8b6b023c2a64c2fb1625211c8077243%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=225044506&rft_id=info:pmid/18595281&rft_ericid=EJ798588&rfr_iscdi=true