Evaluation of contextual variability in prediction of reinforcer effectiveness

Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 117-130

  Pino, Olimpia ^a,c   Dazzi, Carla ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PARMA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

^c Department of Psychology ^*  (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 22144479040     PISSN: 15470350     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Barrett, B. H. (1962). Reduction in rate of multiple ties by free operant conditioning methods. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 135, 187-195.
2. Bailey, J. S. (1981). Wanted: A rational search for the limiting conditions of habilitation in the retarded. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 1, 45-52.
3. Bailey, J. S., & Bostow, D. E. (1979). Research methods in applied behavior analysis. Tallahassee, FL: Copy Grafix.
4. Belfiore, P. J., Browder, D. M., & Mace, C. (1994). Assessing choice-making and preference in adults with profound mental retardation across community and center based settings. Journal of Behavioral Education, 4, 217-225.
5. Campbell, J. M. (2003). Efficacy of behavioral interventions for reducing problem behavior in persons with autism: A quantitative synthesis of single-subject research. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 24, 120-138.
6. Carr, J. E., Nicolson, A. C., & Higbee, T. S. (in press). Evaluation of a brief multiple-stimulus preference assessment in a naturalistic setting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.
7. nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
8. De Leon, I. G., & Iwata, B. A. (1996). Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 519-533.
9. Dyer, K. (1987). The competition of autistic stereotyped behavior with usual and specially assessed reinforcers. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 8, 607-626.
10. Egel, A. L. (1981). Reinforcer variation: Implications for motivating developmentally disabled children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14, 345-350.
11. Fantuzzo, J. W., Rohrbeck, C. A., Hightower, A. D., & Work, W. C. (1991). Teachers' use and children's preferences of rewards in elementary school. Psychology in the Schools, 28, 175-181.
12. Favell, J. E., & Cannon, P. R. (1976). Evaluation of entertainment material for severely retarded persons. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 81, 357-361.
13. Fisher, W., Piazza, C. C., Bowman, L. G., Hagopian, L. P., Owens, J. F., & Slevin, I. (1992). A comparison for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 491-499.
14. Fisher, W., Piazza, C. C., Bowman, L. G., & Amari, A. (1996). Integrating caregiver report with a systematic choice assessment to enhance reinforcer identification. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 101, 15-25.
15. Green, L., & Freed, S. (1993). The substitutability of reinforcers. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 60, 141-158.
16. Green, C. W., Reid, D. H., White, L. K., Halford, R. C., Brittain, D. P., & Gardner, S. M. (1988). Identifying reinforcers for persons with profound handicaps: Staff opinion versus systematic assessment of preferences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 31-43.
17. Higbee, T. S., Carr, J. E., & Harrison, C. D. (2000). Further evaluation of the multiple-stimulus preference assessment. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 21, 61-73.
18. Hughes, C., Pitkin, S. E., & Lorden, S. W. (1998). Assessing preferences and choice of persons with severe and profound mental retardation. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 17, 77-92.
19. Kazdin, A. E. (1982). Single-case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings. New York: Oxford University Press.
20. Kennedy, C., & Haring, T. (1993). Teaching choice making during social interactions to students with profound multiple disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 63-76.
21. Ivancic, M. T., & Bailey, J. S. (1996). Current limits to reinforcer identification for some persons with profound multiple disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 17, 77-92.
22. Iwata, B. A., & Michael, J. L. (1994). Applied implications of theory and research on the nature of reinforcement. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 183-193.
23. LeBlanc, L. A., Patel, M. R., & Carr, J. E. (2000). Recent advances in the assessment of aberrant behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement in individuals with developmental disabilities. Journal of Behavior and Experimental Psychiatry, 31, 137-154.
24. Lindauer, S. E., Zarcone, J. R., Richman, D. M., & Schroeder, S. R. (2002). A comparison of multiple reinforcer assessments to identify the function of maladaptive behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 299-303.
25. Lohrmann-O'Rourke, S., & Browder, D. M. (1998). Empirically based methods to assess the preferences of individual with severe disabilities. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 103, 146-161.
26. Mason, S. S., McGee, G. G., Farmer-Dougan, V., & Risley, T. R. (1989). A practical strategy for ongoing reinforcer assessment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 22, 171-179.
27. Michael, J. (1993). Establishing operations. The Behavior Analyst, 16, 191-206.
28. Nozaki, K., & Mochizuki, A. (1995). Assessing a choice making of a person with profound disabilities: A preliminary analysis. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 20, 196-201.
29. Pace, G. M., Ivancic, M. T., Edwards, G. L., Iwata, B. A., & Page, T. J. (1985). Assessment of stimulus preference and reinforcer value with profoundly retarded individuals. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 249-255.
30. Piazza, C. C., Fisher, W. W., Hagopian, L. P., Bowman, L. G., & Toole, L. (1996). Using a choice assessment to predict reinforcer effectiveness. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 1-9.
31. Pino, O. (2002). Assessment of stimulus preference and reinforcer value in subjects with mental retardation. Paper presented at the IV European conference on Psychological Theory and Research on Mental Retardation and Cognitive Developmental Disabilities, Catania.
32. Pino, O. (2004). Funziono, dunque sono? Un'analisi globale dei fattori di sviluppo neue disabilità. Brescia: Vannini Editrice.
33. Quilitch, H. R., Christophersen, E. R., & Risley, T. R. (1977). The evaluation of children's play materials. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 501-502.
34. Rincover, A., Newsom, C. D., Lovaas, O. I., & Koegel, R. L. (1977). Some motivational properties of sensory stimulation in psychotic children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 24, 312-323.
35. Roane, H. S., Piazza, C. C., Cereone, J. J., & Grados, M. (2002). Assessment and treatment of vocal tics associated with Tourette's Syndrome. Behavior Modification, 26, 482-498.
36. Roane, H. S., Lerman, D. L., & Vorndran, C. M. (2001). Assessing reinforcers under progressive schedule requirements. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34, 145-167.
37. Skinner, B. F. (1971). Beyond freedom and dignity. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
38. Sundberg, M. L. (1993). The application of establishing operations. The Behaviour Analyst, 16, 211-214.
39. Wacker, D. P., Berg, W. K., Wiggins, B., Muldoon, M., & Cavanaugh, J. (1985). Evaluation of reinforcer preference for profoundly handicapped students. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 173-178.
40. Windsor, J., Piche, L. M., & Locke, P. A. (1994). Preference testing: A comparison of two presentation method. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 15, 439-455.