{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02611218568665377, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006769825918762089, 'mean_word_length': 5.9, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Limited matching on concurrent-schedule reinforcement of academic behavior.

Three adolescent students with special educational needs were given a choice between completing one of two available sets of math problems. Reinforcers (nickels) across these alternatives were arranged systematically in separate experimental phases according to three different concurrent variable-interval schedules (reinforcement ratios of 2:1, 6:1, and 12:1). Time allocated to the two stacks of math problems stood in linear relationship to the reinforcement rate obtained from each stack, although substantial undermatching and bias were observed for all subjects. However, changes in the schedules were not followed by changes in allocation patterns until adjunct procedures (e.g., changeover delays, limited holds, timers, and demonstrations) were introduced. The necessity of adjunct procedures in establishing matching in applied situations is discussed as a limitation to quantitative applications of the matching law in applied behavior analysis.