Enhancing Supervisor's Feedback Skills During Paired Stimulus Preference Assessment

A variable that may influence the outcomes of stimulus preference assessments (SPAs) is whether social interaction is provided during the stimulus access period. In Experiment 1, we compared the outcomes of a Solitary paired stimulus preference assessment (PSPA) (toys only), Social PSPA (toys plus social interaction), and Combined PSPA (toys alone and toys plus social interaction) to determine whether the addition of social interaction influenced preference for toys in preschool children. In Experiment 2, we conducted a concurrent-operant reinforcer assessment to compare the reinforcing efficacy of stimuli with and without social interaction. Experiment 1 showed preference for toys was stable across assessments (Solitary and Social PSPAs) and most participants preferred toys plus social interaction when compared in a single assessment (Combined PSPA). Experiment 2 showed that results of the Combined PSPA in Experiment 1 predicted the outcome of most participants' reinforcer assessments.

We evaluated the utility of a brief (5-min) stimulus preference assessment for individuals with developmental disabilities. Participants had noncontingent (free) access to an array of stimuli and could interact with any of the stimuli at any time. Stimuli were never withdrawn or withheld from the participants during a 5-min session. In Experiment 1, the brief preference assessment was conducted for 10 participants to identify differentially preferred stimuli, and reinforcer assessments were conducted to test the reinforcing efficacy of those stimuli identified as highly preferred. In Experiment 2, a comparison was conducted between the brief preference assessment and a commonly used paired-stimulus preference assessment. Collectively, results demonstrated that the brief preference assessment identified stimuli that functioned as reinforcers for a simple operant response, identified preferred stimuli that were differentially effective as reinforcers compared to nonpreferred stimuli, was associated with fewer problem behaviors, and required less time to complete than a commonly used paired-stimulus preference assessment.

There is limited research evaluating behavioral skills training (BST) in university classrooms to teach stimulus preference assessments. We evaluated the effects of BST on three preservice school psychologists' performance with the multiple-stimulus without-replacement preference assessment. A single BST session improved performance across participants, and improvements were maintained 1 week after BST. Limitations, directions for future research, and suggestions for maximizing the efficiency of BST in university classrooms are discussed.

A stimulus preference assessment (SPA) is a fundamental tool used by practitioners to predict stimuli that function as reinforcers. The Behavior Analyst Certification Board (BACB) requires that all certified behavior analysts and behavioral technicians be trained in SPA methodology (BACB, 2017). SPA procedures are used by nearly 9 out of 10 behavior analysts in the field (Graff & Karsten, 2012). Over the last 4 decades, there has been a litany of research on SPA procedures. Despite the universality of training, application, and research, discussions on the selection of SPA procedures have been sparse. Two peer-reviewed articles have focused on clinical decision making in the selection of SPA procedures. Karsten et al. (2011) introduced an in situ decision-making model, whereas Virues-Ortega et al. (2014) developed an a priori algorithm based on client and stimuli characteristics. The SPADS addresses the limitations of prior models by considering the effects of stimuli dimensions, client characteristics, relative administration times, and the outcomes agreement between two potentially efficacious, context-specfic SPA procedures.

DeLeon and Iwata (1996) described the difficulties in applying the percentage approached scoring method to the multiple stimulus without replacement (MSWO) preference assessment relative to its application in the paired stimulus assessment. This scoring method may result in highly preferred items being misidentified as moderate or low preference. In the present study, the results of 57 MSWO assessments were scored using both the percentage approach method and a point weighting method. More items were identified as highly preferred with the point weighting method. Reinforcer assessments were conducted on a subset of stimuli judged to be high preference using the point weighting method but moderately or non-preferred when scored with the percentage approached method; all stimuli functioned as reinforcers. Copyright # 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. In the MSWO procedure (DeLeon and Iwata, 1996), a participant approaches a stimulus from a seven-item array. The item approached is not replaced in the array, resulting in items being presented in an unequal number of trials. DeLeon and Iwata evaluated potential reinforcers with a percentage approached scoring method similar to the one used in the paired stimulus preference assessment (Fisher et al., 1992), but noted that the percentage approached method may make it difficult to identify stimuli that could function as reinforcers. This scoring limitation is a result of the unequal number of opportunities to select each stimulus within and across MSWO sessions. The application of the percentage approach scoring methodology to the MSWO does not take this factor into account. In other words, the percentage approach scoring methodology as applied to the MSWO may result in false negatives, solely as a result of the scoring system. The purpose of the current study was to develop an alternate

We examined the use of a paired stimulus preference assessment (PSPA) to identify preferred items of two adult male western lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla). Subsequently, we validated the most preferred items as reinforcers by assessing the gorillas’ participation in cooperative care-related daily training (also known as husbandry training) where these items were used. Frequency data were collected for the number of times each item was selected during preference assessments and the number of correct short-latency responses from the gorillas during the validation. Results indicate that items identified as preferred in the PSPA functioned as reinforcers for previously learned behaviors during training sessions. We describe the use of the PSPA as an efficient means of identifying potential reinforcers for husbandry training in the zoological setting and demonstrate an embedded methodology to validate the value of items selected frequently in a PSPA.

The paired stimulus preference assessment (PSPA) is commonly used in both research and practice. However, two iterations have been described: a single‐presentation arrangement in which each tested stimulus is paired with one another once and a double‐presentation arrangement in which each tested stimulus is paired twice with counterbalanced placement. Each arrangement may have different advantages; however, no direct comparison exists. Thus, the purpose of the current study was to conduct both PSPA iterations to determine whether there are differences in the results obtained and which iteration was most efficient regarding time to administer. Seven participants were included, and results demonstrated high degrees of correspondence across preference assessment formats. The average time to administer the single‐presentation PSPA (M =6.6 min) was almost half the time to administer a double‐presentation PSPA (M =12.9 min), and no significant differences were observed for problem behavior, side biases, or latency to stimulus selection.

Social stimuli are some of the most commonly used reinforcers. Previous research shows that preference for social stimuli can be identified using paired‐stimulus preference assessments (PSPA) employing various stimulus modes (e.g., pictures of the actual social stimuli). To date, no study has evaluated the correspondence in preference for social stimuli identified via PSPAs completed using three differing stimulus modes. Therefore, this study compared the correspondence in preference hierarchy identified via PSPAs completed using video of the social stimuli (VSM), pictures of the actual social stimuli (PSM‐A), and drawings of the social stimuli (PSM‐D) and whether preference hierarchy remained stable over repeated administration of the PSPAs (i.e., 1 month). Moreover, we assessed participants' preference for the three types of stimulus modes. Results demonstrated that during the initial PSPAs, preference hierarchies were most similar across the PSPAs completed using VSM and PSM‐A, that preference was most stable across repeated administration of the PSPAs completed using the VSM, and that participants' preference for differing stimulus modes was idiosyncratic. Moreover, the PSPAs completed using the VSM required the longest amount of time to create materials and administer the assessment.

The rich technology of stimulus preference assessment (SPA) is a product of 40 years of experimental research. Basic principles of reinforcement and a modest empirical literature suggest that high-preference stimuli identified via SPA may enhance treatment efficacy and decrease problem behavior more effectively than less-preferred stimuli. SPAs can be conducted using one of several methods associated with different time requirements and outcomes. Despite the broad applicability of preference assessments, we are unaware of widely available practitioner guidelines that prescribe when to use SPAs, how to select and modify specific SPA procedures, and how to supplement SPAs with other procedures for maximizing performance. The purpose of the current article is to describe a model for practitioners to select and conduct preference assessments based on practical considerations and research findings. Data are also reported from the application of the proposed model to preference assessments for 20 individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders.

This study replicated and extended the use of a web-based multiple-stimulus-without-replacement preference assessment (Curiel, Curiel, Li, Deochand, & Poling, 2018) by adding a web-based single-operant reinforcer assessment. Five adults diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder participated in this study. The web-based program identified preference hierarchies for 4 of the 5 participants, and the single-operant reinforcer assessment confirmed that the highly preferred videos functioned as reinforcers. Advantages of computer-based stimulus preference and reinforcer assessments are discussed.

Assessing preference and reinforcer effectiveness in dogs

Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine whether duration of eye gaze could be used to identify reinforcing stimuli for four individuals with severe physical and developmental disabilities, as well as the effectiveness of the assessment using different numbers of stimuli (i.e. 6 vs 14).Methods: This study measured each student's preferences in a paired stimulus preference assessment using duration of eye gaze toward various stimuli. Following the preference assessment, a reinforcer assessment was conducted within a reversal design to determine the accuracy of the preference hierarchy.Results: Results indicated that duration of eye gaze toward a stimulus was successful in identifying preferred stimuli that functioned as reinforcers for all participants. Additionally, the shorter preference assessment produced measures of similar accuracy in considerably less time.Conclusion: Eye gaze can be used to identify reinforcing stimuli for individuals with severe physical and developmental disabilities.

The social validity of behavior intervention is rooted in consumer perception. This information is typically garnered through questionnaires and interviews conducted with relevant consumers such as teachers or caregivers. Often, the participants (i.e., the individuals with disabilities receiving the intervention) play less of a role in the assessment of social validity, despite their primary role in intervention. This study examines a procedure for including participants in the assessment of social validity, namely procedural acceptability. Three participants selected their preferred intervention in a paired stimulus preference assessment. Videos presented the intervention options, and participants’ preferred interventions were implemented. These interventions decreased target behavior(s) and increased on-task behavior for all participants. The article concludes with a discussion of implications for use of this procedure and considerations for including participants in social validity assessments.

Preference assessments are used in practice with individuals who engage in food refusal and selectivity to identify foods that a child will readily consume before assessment and treatment. Traditional edible preference assessments may be challenging for children who engage in food refusal or selectivity as the child may not consume foods, but rather engage in inappropriate mealtime behavior simply due to the presence of food. Alternative modality preference assessments, such as pictorial, may offer benefits compared to traditional preference assessment formats (e.g., stimulus preference assessment and paired‐stimulus preference assessment). The use of pictures may reduce any evocative effects of the presence of food and result in choice‐making without inappropriate mealtime behavior. Experiment 1 assessed the correspondence between the hierarchies yielded from pictorial preference assessments (with and without access) to a standard edible preference assessment. Experiment 2 evaluated the accuracy of each preference assessment by presenting foods identified as preferred and non‐preferred to determine if the child would accept them. Results suggested that pictorial preference assessments with access corresponded the most with the traditional edible preference assessment. Also, for one individual, the traditional preference assessment did not accurately identify foods that the participant would consume, while the pictorial preference assessment without access yielded a hierarchy.

Recent studies have shown that moderate (Piazza, Fisher, Hagopian, Bowman, & Toole, 1996) and low (Taravella, Lerman, Contrucci, & Roane, 2000) ranked items on stimulus preference assessments may function as reinforcers. Following an initial preference assessment the current study analyzed whether moderate or low preference items were more likely to be ranked as high preference on subsequent preference assessments. Results show that for five of the seven participants additional high preference items were identified from the moderate preference set, while additional high preference items were identified from the low preference set for only one participant. Results are discussed in terms of the need to identify multiple reinforcers and the composition of the stimulus array during preference assessment. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.