Influencing preschoolers' free-play activity preferences: An evaluation of satiation and embedded reinforcement

Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis

Volumn 42, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 33-41

  Hanley, Gregory P ^a   Tiger, Jeffrey H ^a   Ingvarsson, Einar T ^a   Cammilleri, Anthony P ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS   (United States)

^b Jane Justin Child Study Center   (United States)

Author keywords

Choice; Embedded reinforcement; Free play; Preference assessment; Preschoolers; Satiation

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHILD; DECISION MAKING; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; RECREATION; REINFORCEMENT; SATIETY; TIME;

CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; OBSERVER VARIATION; PLAY AND PLAYTHINGS; REINFORCEMENT (PSYCHOLOGY); SATIATION; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 70449711503     PISSN: 00218855     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2009.42-33     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Allen, K. E., & Schwartz, I. S. (Eds.). (2001). The exceptional child: Inclusion in early childhood education (4th ed.). New York: Delmar.
2. Ayllon, T., & Azrin, N. H. (1968). Reinforcer sampling: A technique for increasing the behavior of mental patients. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 13-20.
3. Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (Eds.). (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
4. Cammilleri, A. P., & Hanley, G. P. (2005). Increasing varied selections of classroom activities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38, 111-116.
5. Charner, K. (1998). The giant encyclopedia of science activities for children 3 to 6. Beltsville, MD: Gryphon House.
6. Essa, E. L. (2003). Early childhood education (4th ed.). New York: Delmar.
7. Fisher, W., Piazza, C. C., Bowman, L. G., Hagopian, L. P., Owens, J. C., & Slevin, I. (1992). A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 491-498.
8. Hanley, G. P., Cammilleri, A. P., Tiger, J. H., & Ingvarsson, E. T. (2007). Towards a method for describing preschoolers' activity preferences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 603-618.
9. Hanley, G. P., Iwata, B. A., & Lindberg, J. S. (1999). Analysis of activity preferences as a function of differential consequences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 419-438.
10. Hanley, G. P., Iwata, B. A., Roscoe, E. M., Thompson, R. H., & Lindberg, J. S. (2003). Response-restriction analysis: II. Alteration of activity preferences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 59-76. (Pubitemid 38613639)
11. Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1975). Incidental teaching of language in the preschool. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 5, 411-420.
12. Jacobson, J. M., Bushell, D., Jr., & Risley, T. (1968). Switching requirements in a Head Start classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2, 43-47.
13. Lawhon, T., & Cobb, J. B. (2002). Routines that build emergent literacy skills in infants, toddlers, and preschoolers. Early Childhood Education Journal, 30, 113-118.
14. Malcom, S. (1998). Perspectives: Making sense of the world. In Dialogue on early childhood science, mathematics and technology education. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
15. Murphy, E. S., McSweeney, F. K., Smith, R. G., & McComas, J. J. (2003). Dynamic changes in reinforcer effectiveness: Theoretical, methodological, and practical implications for applied research. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36, 421-438.