|
| Further Advancements in Preference Assessment Research |
| Saturday, May 24, 2025 |
| 3:00 PM–3:50 PM |
| Marriott Marquis, M4 Level, Independence D |
| Area: AUT; Domain: Applied Research |
| Chair: Timothy Morris (University of Nebraska Medical Center, Munroe-Meyer Institute, Severe Behavior Department) |
| CE Instructor: Cynthia P. Livingston, Ph.D. |
| Abstract: Research on preference assessments is increasingly vital for practitioners, particularly in applied settings with time-sensitive needs. The first study evaluated the impact of a sequential extinction procedure on creating a preference hierarchy for mand modalities and to compare the preferences of children and caregivers. Results indicated that the procedure successfully established a preference hierarchy with minimal problem behavior, although caregiver and child preferences were not fully aligned. The second study evaluated a modified response restriction preference assessment (RRPA) that introduced within-session restriction rules for greater efficiency. The preference hierarchies from the modified RRPA were compared with those from a multiple-stimulus without replacement (MSWO) assessment and a progressive-ratio reinforcer assessment. The findings suggest that the modified RRPA may be an effective and efficient tool for identifying individualized reinforcers. The third study evaluated the one-trial multiple-stimulus (OTMS) preference assessment compared to longer methods, like paired-stimulus (PSPA) and multiple-stimulus without replacement (MSWO). High correspondence was found among all assessment types, and when OTMS results differed from weekly assessments, response rates were similar for presented items. The findings suggest that OTMS is an efficient method for identifying immediate reinforcers in applied settings. |
| Instruction Level: Intermediate |
| Keyword(s): Mand modality, Preference assessment, Response restriction |
| Target Audience: The target audience for this talk is any practitioner who wishes to learn more about preference assessments. Overall, the audience will learn about novel ways to conduct preference assessments effectively and efficiently. Prerequisite skills and knowledge about common preference assessments conducted in the field of Applied Behavior Analysis (i.e., paired-stimulus assessment, multiple-stimulus without replacement preference assessment) are required. |
Learning Objectives: 1. Assess client and caregiver preference for mand modalities
2. Recognize the utility of a one-trial multiple stimulus preference assessment
3. Be able to discriminate when to use a response restriction preference assessment |
| |
| Comparison of Caregiver and Child Mand Modality Preferences Using Sequential Extinction |
| AMAYA ROCHELEAU (University of Nebraska Medical Center), Cynthia P. Livingston (University of Nebraska Medical Center's Munroe-Meyer Institute) |
| Abstract: Functional communication training (FCT) has been found to be an effective treatment for individuals with developmental disabilities (Rooker et al., 2013). Although FCT has been effective, there may be variables that influence its effectiveness, including reinforcement history and proficiency (Ringdahl et al., 2009), response effort (Bailey et al., 2002), and preference for the FCR modality (Kunnavatana et al., 2018). Another variable that may influence the effectiveness of FCT is caregiver and child mand modality preference (Ringdahl et al., 2016). The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of the sequential extinction procedure on the establishment of a preference hierarchy for mand modalities. The second purpose of the current study was to compare child and caregiver mand modality preference hierarchies. Preliminary results suggest the sequential extinction procedure resulted in the establishment of a preference hierarchy with little to no problem behavior. Additionally, caregiver and child preferences did not fully align. Clinical implications are discussed. |
| |
| Evaluation of a Within-Session Response-Restriction Preference Assessment |
| JONAH PATRICK BANN (Louisiana State University), Pierce Taylor (Louisiana State University), Samuel L Morris (Louisiana State University) |
| Abstract: The identification of preferred stimuli that can function as reinforcers is fundamental to behavior-analytic research and practice. The response restriction preference assessment (RRPA; Hanley et al., 2003) is one method of identifying such stimuli. However, the RRPA has infrequently been employed in research and practice, perhaps due to the amount of time required to complete the assessment and obtain a hierarchy of preference. In the current study, we evaluated a modified RRPA that incorporated within-session restriction rules. This allowed the results to be obtained in a more efficient manner. Preference hierarchies produced by the RRPA were compared to the results of a multiple-stimulus without replacement (MSWO) preference assessment and a progressive-ratio reinforcer assessment. Of the four participants who have completed the study to date, three demonstrated greater correspondence to the reinforcer assessment in the RRPA than in the MSWO. Results indicate that the within-session RRPA may be an effective and efficient option for identifying individualized reinforcers. |
| |
Examination of a One-Trial Multiple-Stimulus Preference Assessment |
| GIANNA DAVINO (The New England Center for Children), Jason C. Bourret (New England Center for Children), Carolyn K Robertson (The New England Center for Children), Tory Baker (The New England Center for Children) |
| Abstract: Research on preference assessments has become increasingly important for practitioners, and studies have begun to evaluate time-sensitive assessments which have practical implications for applied settings. This study evaluates the use of a one-trial multiple-stimulus (OTMS) preference assessment in comparison to lengthier preference assessments with individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This method involved conducting weekly paired-stimulus preference assessments (PSPA) and multiple-stimulus without replacement (MSWO) preference assessments with 6-8 edible items, followed by daily OTMS assessments conducted across each week; when the OTMS choice differed from the weekly assessment top choice, a concurrent-operant assessment was conducted to assess reliability, followed by a single-operant assessment to provide information regarding absolute response rates when items are provided contingent on a response. We found high correspondence between the PSPA, MSWO, and OTMS assessments for our participants. When the outcome of OTMS assessment differed from the weekly assessment, single-operant assessments demonstrated that response rates were similar when both items were presented contingent on a response. These results suggest that the OTMS assessment is an efficient and effective method to determine an in-the-moment reinforcer, which can be frequently administered prior or within session, in applied settings. |
|
| |