在使用填空法和多项选择法时控制贴现率的程序方面

The behavior analyst today Pub Date : 2014-07-01 DOI:10.1037/H0101281

J. Weatherly, Kathryn A. Feltman, A. Derenne

{"title":"在使用填空法和多项选择法时控制贴现率的程序方面","authors":"J. Weatherly, Kathryn A. Feltman, A. Derenne","doi":"10.1037/H0101281","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present study investigated if and why rates of delay or probability discounting would vary as a function of whether the data were collected using the fill-in-the-blank (FITB) or multiple-choice (MC) method. Participants in Experiment 1 completed a discounting task using either the FITB or MC met","PeriodicalId":88717,"journal":{"name":"The behavior analyst today","volume":"14 1","pages":"9-16"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Procedural aspects that control discounting rates when using the fill-in-the-blank and multiple-choice methods\",\"authors\":\"J. Weatherly, Kathryn A. Feltman, A. Derenne\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/H0101281\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The present study investigated if and why rates of delay or probability discounting would vary as a function of whether the data were collected using the fill-in-the-blank (FITB) or multiple-choice (MC) method. Participants in Experiment 1 completed a discounting task using either the FITB or MC met\",\"PeriodicalId\":88717,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The behavior analyst today\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"9-16\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The behavior analyst today\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/H0101281\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The behavior analyst today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/H0101281","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

摘要

本研究调查了延迟或概率折扣率是否以及为什么会随着数据是使用填空(FITB)还是选择题(MC)方法收集而变化。实验1的参与者使用FITB或MC会议完成了一个折扣任务

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Procedural aspects that control discounting rates when using the fill-in-the-blank and multiple-choice methods

The present study investigated if and why rates of delay or probability discounting would vary as a function of whether the data were collected using the fill-in-the-blank (FITB) or multiple-choice (MC) method. Participants in Experiment 1 completed a discounting task using either the FITB or MC met

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

The behavior analyst today

自引率

0.00%

发文量