Comparing preference assessments: Selection- versus duration-based preference assessment procedures

Research in Developmental Disabilities

Volumn 30, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 1068-1077

  Kodak, Tiffany ^a   Fisher, Wayne W ^a   Kelley, Michael E ^b   Kisamore, April ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN MAINE   (United States)

^c WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Concurrent operants; Preference assessment; Reinforcer assessment

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHILD; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDER; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRESCHOOL CHILD; SCHOOL CHILD;

CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; CONDITIONING, OPERANT; DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; REINFORCEMENT (PSYCHOLOGY); REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULE;

EID: 64649107049     PISSN: 08914222     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ridd.2009.02.010     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. DeLeon I.G., and Iwata B.A. Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 29 (1996) 519-533
2. DeLeon I.G., Iwata B.A., Goh H., and Worsdell A.S. Emergence of reinforcer preference as a function of schedule requirements and stimulus similarity. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 30 (1997) 439-449
3. DeLeon I.G., Iwata B.A., Conners J., and Wallace M.D. Examination of ambiguous stimulus preferences with duration-based measures. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 32 (1999) 111-114
4. Fisher W.W., and Mazur J.E. Basic and applied research on choice responding. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 30 (1997) 387-410
5. Fisher W.W., Piazza C.C., Bowman L.G., Hagopian L.P., Owens J.C., and Slevin I. A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 25 (1992) 491-498
6. Fisher W.W., Piazza C.C., Bowman L.G., and Amari A. Integrating caregiver report with a systematic choice assessment to enhance reinforcer identification. American Journal on Mental Retardation 101 (1996) 15-25
7. Northup J., George T., Jones K., Broussard C., and Vollmer T.R. A comparison of reinforcer assessment methods: The utility of verbal and pictorial choice procedures. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 29 (1996) 201-212
8. Pace G.M., Ivancic M.T., Edwards G.L., Iwata B.A., and Page T.J. Assessment of stimulus preference and reinforcer value with profoundly retarded individuals. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 18 (1985) 249-255
9. Piazza C.C., Fisher W.W., Hagopian L.P., Bowman L.G., and Toole L. Using a choice assessment to predict reinforcer effectiveness. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 29 (1996) 1-9
10. Roane H.S., Vollmer T.R., Ringdahl J.E., and Marcus B.A. Evaluation of a brief stimulus preference assessment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 31 (1998) 605-620
11. Roscoe E.M., Iwata B.A., and Kahng S. Relative versus absolute reinforcement effects: Implications for preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 32 (1999) 479-493
12. Steinhilber J., and Johnson C. The effects of brief and extended stimulus availability on preference. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 40 (2007) 767-772
13. Vollmer T.R., Marcus B.A., and LeBlanc L. Treatment of self-injury and hand mouthing following inconclusive functional analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 27 (1994) 331-344
14. Windsor J., Piché L.M., and Locke P.A. Preference testing: A comparison of two presentation methods. Research in Developmental Disabilities 15 (1994) 439-455