Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&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
A competing stimulus assessment (CSA) is commonly used to identify leisure items for use in treatments designed to decrease automatically reinforced problem behavior. However, this type of assessment may not yield useful information if participants do not readily engage with leisure items. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a modified CSA that included additional treatment components (i.e., prompting, prompting plus differential reinforcement of alternative behavior). The modified CSA identified the treatment components and leisure items that were most effective for increasing leisure-item engagement and decreasing problem behavior for each participant. Modified CSA outcomes maintained during an extended treatment analysis in a natural setting and when intervention components were faded.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jaba.695 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!