TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparing preference assessments
T2 - Selection- versus duration-based preference assessment procedures
AU - Kodak, Tiffany
AU - Fisher, Wayne W.
AU - Kelley, Michael E.
AU - Kisamore, April
PY - 2009/9
Y1 - 2009/9
N2 - In the current investigation, the results of a selection- and a duration-based preference assessment procedure were compared. A Multiple Stimulus With Replacement (MSW) preference assessment [Windsor, J., Piché, L. M., & Locke, P. A. (1994). Preference testing: A comparison of two presentation methods. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 15, 439-455] and a variation of a Free-Operant (FO) preference assessment procedure [Roane, H. S., Vollmer, T. R., Ringdahl, J. E., & Marcus, B. A. (1998). Evaluation of a brief stimulus preference assessment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 605-620] were conducted with four participants. A reinforcer assessment was conducted to determine which preference assessment procedure identified the item that produced the highest rates of responding. The items identified as most highly preferred were different across preference assessment procedures for all participants. Results of the reinforcer assessment showed that the MSW identified the item that functioned as the most effective reinforcer for two participants.
AB - In the current investigation, the results of a selection- and a duration-based preference assessment procedure were compared. A Multiple Stimulus With Replacement (MSW) preference assessment [Windsor, J., Piché, L. M., & Locke, P. A. (1994). Preference testing: A comparison of two presentation methods. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 15, 439-455] and a variation of a Free-Operant (FO) preference assessment procedure [Roane, H. S., Vollmer, T. R., Ringdahl, J. E., & Marcus, B. A. (1998). Evaluation of a brief stimulus preference assessment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 605-620] were conducted with four participants. A reinforcer assessment was conducted to determine which preference assessment procedure identified the item that produced the highest rates of responding. The items identified as most highly preferred were different across preference assessment procedures for all participants. Results of the reinforcer assessment showed that the MSW identified the item that functioned as the most effective reinforcer for two participants.
KW - Concurrent operants
KW - Preference assessment
KW - Reinforcer assessment
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=64649107049&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=64649107049&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ridd.2009.02.010
DO - 10.1016/j.ridd.2009.02.010
M3 - Article
C2 - 19327964
AN - SCOPUS:64649107049
VL - 30
SP - 1068
EP - 1077
JO - Research in Developmental Disabilities
JF - Research in Developmental Disabilities
SN - 0891-4222
IS - 5
ER -