Literature DB >> 20190919

Evaluation of the multiple-stimulus without replacement preference assessment method using activities as stimuli.

Edward J Daly1, Nikki J Wells, Michelle S Swanger-Gagné, James E Carr, Gina M Kunz, Ashley M Taylor.   

Abstract

The current study examined the accuracy of the multiple-stimulus without replacement (MSWO) preference assessment for identifying preferred common classroom activities as reinforcers with children with behavioral disorders. The accuracy of predictions from the MSWO regarding high, medium, and low stimulus preference was tested by providing contingent access to activities for completing math problems within an independent seatwork format. Overall, there was an interaction effect between preference ranking (high, medium, or low) and number of problems completed. The results confirm and extend previous findings regarding the accuracy of predictions with the MSWO. The findings also reveal, however, some individual differences that may account for instances in which student behavior did not conform to predictions of stimulus preference assessments.

Entities:  

Keywords:  math problem completion; preference assessment; preferences; reinforcer

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20190919      PMCID: PMC2741066          DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2009.42-563

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


  14 in total

1.  Further evaluation of the multiple-stimulus preference assessment.

Authors:  T S Higbee; J E Carr; C D Harrison
Journal:  Res Dev Disabil       Date:  2000 Jan-Feb

2.  Further evaluation of low-ranked items in stimulus-choice preference assessments.

Authors:  C C Taravella; D C Lerman; S A Contrucci; H S Roane
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2000

3.  Further evaluation of the accuracy of reinforcer surveys: a systematic replication.

Authors:  J Northup
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2000

4.  A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities.

Authors:  W Fisher; C C Piazza; L G Bowman; L P Hagopian; J C Owens; I Slevin
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1992

5.  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

6.  An evaluation of a brief multiple-stimulus preference assessment with adolescents with emotional-behavioral disorders in an educational setting.

Authors:  Nancy W Paramore; Thomas S Higbee
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2005

7.  Evaluation of a brief multiple-stimulus preference assessment in a naturalistic context.

Authors:  J E Carr; A C Nicolson; T S Higbee
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2000

8.  A comparison of verbal and tangible stimulus preference assessments.

Authors:  D Cohen-Almeida; R B Graff; W H Ahearn
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2000

9.  A preliminary comparison of reinforcer assessment methods for children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Authors:  J Northup; K Jones; C Broussard; T George
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1995

10.  A comparison of reinforcer assessment methods: the utility of verbal and pictorial choice procedures.

Authors:  J Northup; T George; K Jones; C Broussard; T R Vollmer
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1996
View more
  2 in total

1.  Problem behavior during preference assessments: an empirical analysis and practical recommendations.

Authors:  Soyeon Kang; Russell B Lang; Mark F O'Reilly; Tonya N Davis; Wendy Machalicek; Mandy J Rispoli; Jeffrey M Chan
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2010-03

Review 2.  Stimulus Preference Assessment Decision-Making System (SPADS): A Decision-Making Model for Practitioners.

Authors:  Jordan D Lill; Mark D Shriver; Keith D Allen
Journal:  Behav Anal Pract       Date:  2021-04-30
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.