scholarly journals Signaling the omission of a response-contingent outcome reduces discriminative control

1993 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 337-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth M. Colwill
Keyword(s):  
Discriminative Control ◽  
Response Contingent

The discriminative control of a conditioned heart rate response.

1957 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip J. Bersh ◽  
Joseph M. Notterman ◽  
William N. Schoenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Heart Rate ◽  
Heart Rate Response ◽  
Discriminative Control ◽  
Conditioned Heart Rate

Response contingent illumination change as a reinforcer in the rat

1972 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 259-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
D.I. Williams ◽  
G. Lowe
Keyword(s):  
Illumination Change ◽  
Response Contingent

The Effect of Response Contingent Verbal Punishment on Stuttering

1967 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 795-800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raymond W. Quist ◽  
Richard R. Martin
Keyword(s):  
Adult Male ◽  
Dramatic Reduction ◽  
Response Contingent

The effects of response contingent “wrong” on stuttering were studied in three adult male stutterers. Each subject’s stuttering baserate was obtained, then “wrong” was made contingent on each stuttering. For two subjects, “wrong” occasioned a 30% to 40% reduction in stuttering frequency. For a third subject, response contingent “wrong” produced almost total suppression of stuttering, removal of “wrong” was followed by a return to baserate frequency, and reintroduction of “wrong” resulted in an immediate and dramatic reduction in stuttering.

scholarly journals Efficacy Trial of Contrasting Approaches to the Response-Contingent Learning of Young Children with Significant Developmental Delays and Multiple Disabilities

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melinda Raab ◽  
Carl J. Dunst ◽  
Deborah W. Hamby
Keyword(s):  
Young Children ◽  
Developmental Delays ◽  
Primary Caregivers ◽  
Multiple Disabilities ◽  
Learning Opportunities ◽  
Efficacy Trial ◽  
Response Contingent ◽  
Very Young Children ◽  
Randomized Control ◽  
Efficient Learning

Findings from a randomized control design efficacy trial of an asset-based vs. needs-based approach to the response-contingent learning of infants and toddlers with significant developmental delays and disabilities who did not use instrumental behavior to produce or elicit reinforcing consequences are reported. The investigation included 71 children randomly assigned to the two contrasting types of interventions. The asset-based intervention and needs-based intervention differed in terms of how child behavior were identified and used to elicit reinforcing consequences as part of response-contingent learning games implemented by the children’s parents or other primary caregivers. Children in the asset-based group were provided more learning opportunities, acquired more response-contingent behavior, and demonstrated more efficient learning compared to children in the needs-based group. Implications for improving practices for very young children with significant developmental delays and multiple disabilities are described.

scholarly journals Response-contingent and non-contingent informative and redundant secondary reinforcers

1967 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. 293-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald F. McCausland ◽  
George W. Menzer ◽  
Thomas K. Dempsey ◽  
John C. Birkimer
Keyword(s):  
Response Contingent
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document