Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Different combinations of immediate and delayed consequences differentially affect choice. Basic research has found that nonhuman animals are more likely to choose an alternative that produces an immediate reinforcer that is followed by a delayed punisher as the delay to punishment increases. The purpose of the current effort was to examine the choices of three individuals with autism when they were given the choice between receiving a larger amount of preferred food followed by a mild, delayed verbal punisher and a smaller amount of the preferred food. A secondary purpose was to determine whether signal presence and duration would affect the efficacy of the punisher (i.e., whether children would be more likely to select the smaller reward that was not followed by a delayed punisher). Results were idiosyncratic across children and highlight the need to evaluate choice under multiple arrangements.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0145445515622382 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!