Literature DB >> 7871232

Preference testing: a comparison of two presentation methods.

J Windsor1, L M Piché, P A Locke.   

Abstract

Paired and group presentation methods of preference testing were compared with eight learners with severe-profound developmental disabilities. Each presentation method was also compared with staff rankings of learners' preferences. Similar preferences were identified with both presentation methods. Although the paired presentation took more time to administer, it elicited more consistent preference information than the group presentation. Staff preference rankings were not highly correlated with either the group or paired presentation. However, items identified as most preferred by staff and by both presentation methods were similar.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7871232     DOI: 10.1016/0891-4222(94)90028-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Res Dev Disabil        ISSN: 0891-4222


  24 in total

1.  A comparison of presession and within-session reinforcement choice.

Authors:  R B Graff; M E Libby
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1999

2.  The effects of presession exposure to attention on the results of assessments of attention as a reinforcer.

Authors:  W K Berg; S Peck; D P Wacker; J Harding; J McComas; D Richman; K Brown
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2000

3.  An analysis of choice making in the assessment of young children with severe behavior problems.

Authors:  J W Harding; D P Wacker; W K Berg; L J Cooper; J Asmus; K Mlela; J Muller
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1999

4.  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

5.  Evaluation of the rate of problem behavior maintained by different reinforcers across preference assessments.

Authors:  Soyeon Kang; Mark F O'Reilly; Christina L Fragale; Jeannie M Aguilar; Mandy Rispoli; Russell Lang
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2011

6.  Functional analysis and treatment of rumination using fixed-time delivery of a flavor spray.

Authors:  David A Wilder; Martisa Register; Stanley Register; Vedrana Bajagic; Pamela L Neidert
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2009

7.  Evaluation of a brief stimulus preference assessment.

Authors:  H S Roane; T R Vollmer; J E Ringdahl; B A Marcus
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1998

8.  Emergence of reinforcer preference as a function of schedule requirements and stimulus similarity.

Authors:  I G DeLeon; B A Iwata; H L Goh; A S Worsdell
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1997

9.  Teacher report and direct assessment of preferences for identifying reinforcers for young children.

Authors:  Catherine A Cote; Rachel H Thompson; Gregory P Hanley; Paige M McKerchar
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2007

10.  Effects of Choice of Work Tasks on On-Task, Aberrant, Happiness and Unhappiness Behaviours of Persons with Developmental Disabilities.

Authors:  Sara Spevack; Toby L Martin; Rene Hiebert; C T Yu; Garry L Martin
Journal:  J Dev Disabl       Date:  2004
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.