Literature DB >> 10396769

A comparison of presession and within-session reinforcement choice.

R B Graff1, M E Libby.   

Abstract

Single- and concurrent-operants procedures were used to evaluate the effects of two reinforcement conditions on the free-operant responding of 3 individuals with developmental disabilities and 1 with attention deficit disorder. In the presession choice condition, prior to each session the participant chose one item from an array of three different highly preferred stimuli. This item was delivered by the experimenter on each reinforcer delivery during that session. In the within-session choice condition, each reinforcer delivery consisted of placing an array of three different highly preferred stimuli in front of the participant, who was allowed to select one. Only one of the two reinforcement conditions was in effect for any particular session in single-operant phases. Buttons associated with each reinforcement condition were present, and the participant could allocate responses to one or the other in concurrent-operants phases. Data showed substantially more responding to the button associated with within-session choice than presession choice during concurrent-operants phases. This effect was not as apparent during single-operant phases, suggesting that a concurrent-operants procedure provided the more sensitive evaluation of within-session and presession reinforcer choice effects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10396769      PMCID: PMC1284175          DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1999.32-161

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal        ISSN: 0021-8855


  25 in total

1.  Teaching arbitrary matching via sample stimulus-control shaping to young children and mentally retarded individuals: a methodological note.

Authors:  D M Zygmont; R M Lazar; W V Dube; W J McIlvane
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Assessment of preference for varied versus constant reinforcers.

Authors:  L G Bowman; C C Piazza; W W Fisher; L P Hagopian; J S Kogan
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1997

Review 3.  Attentional functioning and relational learning.

Authors:  S A Soraci; C W Deckner; A A Baumeister; M T Carlin
Journal:  Am J Ment Retard       Date:  1990-11

4.  Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences.

Authors:  I G DeLeon; B A Iwata
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1996

Review 5.  Basic and applied research on choice responding.

Authors:  W W Fisher; J E Mazur
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1997

6.  Preferred curricular activities and reduced problem behaviors in students with intellectual disabilities.

Authors:  L Foster-Johnson; J Ferro; G Dunlap
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1994

7.  Choice making to promote adaptive behavior for students with emotional and behavioral challenges.

Authors:  G Dunlap; M dePerczel; S Clarke; D Wilson; S Wright; R White; A Gomez
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1994

8.  Preference testing: a comparison of two presentation methods.

Authors:  J Windsor; L M Piché; P A Locke
Journal:  Res Dev Disabil       Date:  1994 Nov-Dec

9.  Choice-making treatment of young children's severe behavior problems.

Authors:  S M Peck; D P Wacker; W K Berg; L J Cooper; K A Brown; D Richman; J J McComas; P Frischmeyer; T Millard
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1996

10.  Acquisition of matching - to - sample performances in severe retardation: learning by exclusion.

Authors:  W J McIlvane; T Stoddard
Journal:  J Ment Defic Res       Date:  1981-03
View more
  5 in total

1.  Examination of relative reinforcement effects of stimuli identified through pretreatment and daily brief preference assessments.

Authors:  I G DeLeon; W W Fisher; V Rodriguez-Catter; K Maglieri; K Herman; J M Marhefka
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2001

2.  Motivational influences on performance maintained by food reinforcement.

Authors:  Stephen T North; Brian A Iwata
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2005

3.  Response competition and stimulus preference in the treatment of automatically reinforced behavior: a comparison.

Authors:  Mark P Groskreutz; Nicole C Groskreutz; Thomas S Higbee
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2011

4.  Relative versus absolute reinforcement effects: implications for preference assessments.

Authors:  E M Roscoe; B A Iwata; S Kahng
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1999

5.  Effects of reinforcer choice measured in single-operant and concurrent-schedule procedures.

Authors:  A S Geckeler; M E Libby; R B Graff; W H Ahearn
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2000
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.