Validity of the multiple-stimulus without replacement preference assessment for edible items

Studies have shown that the multiple-stimulus without replacement (MSWO) preference assessment is an effective assessment format for identifying preferred items. However, it is possible that factors other than reinforcer quality might influence selections by some individuals when the MSWO array consists of edible items. The validity of the MSWO results was evaluated by comparing items identified as most and least preferred by the MSWO assessment in a concurrent-schedule (CS) format. Varying edible items were used in each study. The MSWO format accurately identified the higher quality edible item for most participants across studies (76%); however, the MSWO format did not predict the highest quality edible item in the CS assessment for 20% to 30% of participants in each study.     

EVALUATION OF THE MULTIPLE-STIMULUS WITHOUT REPLACEMENT PREFERENCE ASSESSMENT METHOD USING ACTIVITIES AS STIMULI

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.     

Multiple-Stimulus Without Replacement Preference Assessment for Students at Risk for Emotional Disturbance

The ability of educators to identify consequences that act as reinforcers may predict the success of behavior change strategies predicated on the use of reinforcement. Supported for individuals with severe disabilities, research concerning the effectiveness of choice-stimulus assessment for students with emotional disturbance (ED) remains limited. The current study evaluated the effectiveness of brief multiple-stimulus without replacement (MSWO) procedures in identifying reinforcers for three elementary students with or at risk for ED. The study compared the effects of MSWO and vocal nomination of preferences on the use of cover, copy, and compare (CCC)—an evidence-based math facts acquisition strategy—using an alternating treatments design. Additional analyses concerned the correspondence between assessments. The stability of the MSWO and vocal nomination assessments was also assessed. Results indicated that the MSWO assessment identified effective reinforcers for students at risk for ED and generated more consistent findings than vocal nomination. In one of three cases, the reinforcers identified by the MSWO assessment resulted in more frequent use of CCC than nominated reinforcers. Directions for future research and implications follow a discussion of findings.     

PROBLEM BEHAVIOR DURING PREFERENCE ASSESSMENTS: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS AND PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

Preferences of 2 children with developmental disabilities, whose functional analyses indicated that their problem behavior was maintained by access to tangible items, were assessed using three formats (i.e., paired stimulus [PS], multiple‐stimulus without replacement [MSWO], and free operant [FO]). The experimenter administered each format five times and compared levels of problem behavior across formats in a multielement design. Both participants exhibited problem behavior in PS and MSWO formats but not in the FO format. Results are discussed in terms of recommendations for practitioners.     

An Evaluation of a Brief Multiple-Stimulus Without Replacement Preference Assessment Conducted in an Electronic Pictorial Format

We compared the results of a brief electronic pictorial multiple-stimulus without replacement (EP-MSWO) preference assessment to a brief tangible MSWO preference assessment in five children with autism. Results of both assessments yielded a match between high preferred (HP) toys for four participants and low preferred toys for three participants. The overall correlation between assessments across participants was strong and statistically significant (ρ = .67, p < .01). A reinforcer assessment conducted with three participants confirmed HP toys identified in the EP-MSWO functioned as reinforcers.     

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

The rates of problem behavior maintained by different reinforcers were evaluated across 3 preference assessment formats (i.e., paired stimulus, multiple-stimulus without replacement, and free operant). The experimenter administered each assessment format 5 times in a random order for 7 children with developmental disabilities whose problem behavior was maintained by attention, tangible items, or escape. Results demonstrated different effects related to the occurrence of problem behavior, suggesting an interaction between function of problem behavior and assessment format. Implications for practitioners are discussed with respect to assessing preferences of individuals with developmental disabilities who exhibit problem behavior.     

An alternate scoring method for the multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessment

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.     

On the displacement of leisure items by food during multiple-stimulus preference assessments

Previous studies have demonstrated that when food and leisure stimuli are combined in multiple-stimulus preference assessments, individuals typically select food more often, although the leisure stimuli also have known reinforcing properties. The purpose of the current study was to replicate this effect and determine its durability by examining the effect after mealtimes. Four adults who had been diagnosed with severe mental retardation were given three initial multiple-stimulus (without replacement) preference assessments (i.e., food, leisure stimuli, and combined). All participants selected food items as the most preferred stimuli in the combined assessments. Combined assessments were then administered immediately before and after the evening meal for each participant for 1 week. The results showed similar data both before and after mealtimes.     

CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN SINGLE VERSUS DAILY PREFERENCE ASSESSMENT OUTCOMES AND REINFORCER EFFICACY UNDER PROGRESSIVE‐RATIO SCHEDULES

Research has suggested that a daily multiple‐stimulus‐without‐replacement (MSWO) preference assessment may be more sensitive to changes in preference than other assessment formats, thereby resulting in greater correspondence with reinforcer efficacy over time ( DeLeon et al., 2001 ). However, most prior studies have measured reinforcer efficacy using rate of responding under single‐operant arrangements and dense schedules or under concurrent‐operants arrangements. An alternative measure of reinforcer efficacy involves the evaluation of responding under progressive‐ratio (PR) schedules. In the present study, 7 participants were given a single paired‐stimulus (PS) preference assessment followed by daily MSWO preference assessments. After each daily MSWO, participants responded for each stimulus on a PR schedule. The correspondence between break points and preferences, as assessed by the 2 assessment formats, was examined. Results demonstrated that both preference assessments did equally well at predicting reinforcer efficacy, although the PS more consistently identified the most effective reinforcer.     

Increasing accurate preference assessment implementation through pyramidal training

Preference assessments directly evaluate items that may serve as reinforcers, and their implementation is an important skill for individuals who work with children. This study examined the effectiveness of pyramidal training on teachers' implementation of preference assessments. During Experiment 1, 3 special education teachers taught 6 trainees to conduct paired-choice, multiple-stimulus without replacement, and free-operant preference assessments. All trainees acquired skills necessary to implement preference assessments with 90% or greater accuracy during the training sessions and demonstrated generalization of skills to their classrooms or clinic. During Experiment 2, 5 teachers who served as trainees in Experiment 1 trained 18 preschool teachers. All preschool teachers met the mastery criterion following training. Training teachers to implement preference assessments may increase teachers' acceptance and use of behavior-analytic procedures in school settings.     

The measurement and reinforcement of behavior of psychotics

An attempt was made to strengthen behaviors of psychotics by applying operant reinforcement principles in a mental hospital ward. The behaviors studied were necessary and/or useful for the patient to function in the hospital environment. Reinforcement consisted of the opportunity to engage in activities that had a high level of occurrence when freely allowed. Tokens were used as conditioned reinforcers to bridge the delay between behavior and reinforcement. Emphasis was placed on objective definition and quantification of the responses and reinforcers and upon programming and recording procedures. Standardizing the objective criteria permitted ward attendants to administer the program. The procedures were found to be effective in maintaining the desired adaptive behaviors for as long as the procedures were in effect. In a series of six experiments, reinforced behaviors were considerably reduced when the reinforcement procedure was discontinued; the adaptive behaviors increased immediately when the reinforcement procedure was re-introduced.     

A replication of the response‐restriction preference assessment

We replicated the response‐restriction (RR) preference assessment and compared results in terms of preference hierarchies to those from free‐operant and multiple stimulus without replacement (MSWO) formats with six children with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs). We also assessed social validity of each format with teachers and clinicians who work with children with ASDs. Complete hierarchies were produced in four of 18 assessments and with MSWO and RR formats only. Results of the social validity assessment varied across raters, with each preference assessment format receiving the highest rating from at least one rater. Results are discussed in terms of practical recommendations and relative to the preference assessment literature as a whole.     

Stimulus class membership established via stimulus-reinforcer relations

In an arbitrary matching-to-sample procedure, two mentally retarded subjects learned conditional discriminations with two sets of stimuli. Each set included a spoken name (N1 or N2), an object (O1 or O2), and a printed symbol (S1 or S2). One subject selected conditionally (a) O1 upon N1, and O2 upon N2, and (b) S1 upon O1, and S2 upon O2. The other subject selected conditionally (a) S1 upon N1, and S2 upon N2, and (b) O1 upon S1, and O2 upon S2. For both subjects, selections of O1 and S1 produced one type of food, F1; selections of O2 and S2 produced a different type of food, F2. Both subjects also learned identity-matching performances, selecting O1, O2, S1, S2, F1, and F2 conditionally upon those stimuli as samples; F1 followed selections of O1, S1, and F1; F2 followed selections of O2, S2, and F2. Matching performances consistent with stimulus class formation involving the names, objects, symbols, and foods were demonstrated on probe trials, even though these performances had not been taught explicitly. Next, new objects, X1 and X2, were presented on identity-matching trials, producing F1 and F2, respectively. Without further training, X1 was selected conditionally upon N1, S1, and O1, and X2 was selected upon N2, S2, and O2. When the contingencies were changed so that selections of X1 and X2 were now followed by F2 and F1, respectively, X2 was selected conditionally upon N1, S1, and O1, and X1 was selected upon N2, S2, and O2. Class membership of X1 and X2 had apparently changed. This study provides evidence that reinforcers may become members of stimulus classes, and that new stimuli may become class members through relations with reinforcers.     

Reinforcer frequency and restricted stimulus control.

Stimulus control was evaluated in 3 individuals with moderate to severe mental retardation by delayed identity matching-to-sample procedures that presented either one or two discrete forms as sample stimuli on each trial. On pretests, accuracy scores on one-sample trials were uniformly high. On two-sample trials, the correct stimulus (i.e., the one that subsequently appeared in the comparison array) varied unpredictably, and accuracy scores were substantially lower, suggesting that both sample stimuli did not exert stimulus control on every trial. Subjects were then given training sessions with the one-sample task and with a new set of four stimuli. For two of the stimuli, correct matching responses were followed by reinforcers on a variable-ratio schedule that led to a high reinforcer rate. For the other two stimuli, correct responses were followed by reinforcers on a variable-ratio schedule that led to a substantially lower reinforcer rate. Results on two-sample tests that followed showed that (a) on trials in which comparison arrays consisted of one high reinforcer-rate and one low reinforcer-rate stimulus, subjects most often selected the high-rate stimulus; and (b) on trials in which the comparison arrays were either two high reinforcer-rate stimuli or two low reinforcer-rate stimuli and the samples were one high reinforcer- and one low reinforcer-rate stimulus, accuracy was higher on trials with the high-rate comparisons. These results indicate that the frequency of stimulus control by high reinforcer-rate samples was greater than that by low reinforcer-rate samples. Following more training with the one-sample task and reversed reinforcement schedules for all stimuli, the differences in stimulus control frequencies on two-sample tests also reversed. These results demonstrate experimental control by reinforcement contingencies of which of two sample stimuli controlled selections in the two-sample task. The procedures and results may prove to be relevant for understanding restricted stimulus control and stimulus overselectivity.     

Emergent simple discrimination established by indirect relation to differential consequences

Three experiments examined a discrimination training sequence that led to emergent simple discrimination in human subjects. The experiments differed primarily in their subject populations. Normally capable adults served in the first experiment, preschool children in the second, and mentally retarded adults in the third. In all experiments, subjects learned a simple simultaneous discrimination: When visual stimuli A1 and A2 were displayed together, reinforcers followed selections of A1, the S+, but not A2, the S-. The subjects also learned a conditional discrimination taught with an arbitrary visual-visual matching-to-sample procedure. Comparisons were two additional visual stimuli, B1 and B2, and samples were A1 and A2. Reinforcers followed selections of B1 in the presence of A1 and of B2 in the presence of A2. After the simple-discrimination and conditional-discrimination baselines had been acquired, B1 and B2 were displayed alone (without a sample) on probe trials. Subjects had never been taught explicitly how to respond to such displays. Nonetheless, they almost always selected B1, which was involved in a conditional relation with A1, the stimulus that served as S+ on the simple-discrimination trials. This outcome suggested the formation of stimulus classes during conditional-discrimination training. Through class formation, B1 and B2 had apparently acquired stimulus functions similar to those shown by A1 and A2 on simple-discrimination trials, thereby leading to emergent selections of B1 on the probes.     

The merger and development of equivalence classes by unreinforced conditional selection of comparison stimuli

Three experiments assessed the likelihood that subjects with histories of equivalence class development would respond conditionally on new discriminations in the absence of differential consequences for responses. In the first two experiments, two groups of subjects with different experimental histories, but whose performances showed four equivalence classes, responded on trials without explicit reinforcement involving samples from two of the classes and comparisons from the other two classes, in a two-choice matching-to-sample format. Subjects consistently selected a particular comparison in the presence of a particular sample. Subsequent tests showed the emergence of equivalence relations between stimuli from classes linked by the unreinforced conditional selections. Subsequently, in Experiment II, the subjects' responses in the conditional selection trials were reinforced if the selection was reversed from that made previously. Although reversed selection was maintained, 2 of the 3 subjects continued to perform on equivalence relation trials according to their original unreinforced selections. In the third experiment, these 2 subjects responded on a series of conditional discriminations involving three new pairs of sample stimuli and one new pair of comparison stimuli. No explicit reinforcement followed responses on any trial in this experiment. Subsequent tests for equivalence between sample stimuli revealed the development of two equivalence classes.     

The multiple-stimulus-without-replacement preference assessment tool and its predictive validity

This study demonstrates the use of two web-based programs, one to identify video preferences and the other to assess their reinforcing effects. We used the Multiple-Stimulus-Without-Replacement Preference Assessment Tool (MSWO PAT) to identify the video preference hierarchies of seven participants, ages 4–11 years old. We then used a customized reinforcer assessment program that arranged a concurrent-chains preparation with programmed conjugate schedules of reinforcement. Button presses emitted by participants modulated the quality (volume and opacity) of selected videos on a moment-to-moment basis, allowing us to identify the reinforcing effects of the videos in little time. The results showed that the preference assessment had predictive value for five of seven participants. We discuss the MSWO PAT, parameters that may affect the identification of preferences and the use of conjugate schedules to identify reinforcers.     

Further refinement of video‐based brief multiple‐stimulus without replacement preference assessments

We compared the results of a brief video‐based multiple‐stimulus without replacement preference assessment with no access to chosen activities (MSWO‐NO) to the results of the same assessment with access (MSWO‐WA) with four children with autism. We also compared instructor rankings of activities to MSWO‐WA results. Strong to moderate correlations between MSWO‐NO and MSWO‐WA assessment results were found across all participants. The correlation between MSWO‐WA and instructor rankings ranged from strong to low across all participants. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.     

Further examination of video‐based preference assessments without contingent access

The first purpose of this study was to attempt to replicate previous findings that video‐based preference assessments without access to selected stimuli may accurately predict relative reinforcing efficacy of stimuli. To do this, we conducted a concurrent operant reinforcer assessment in which we evaluated the relative reinforcing value of highly preferred and less preferred items identified in a video‐based preference assessment. The second purpose of this study was to begin to evaluate the potential behavioral mechanisms responsible for the validity of this assessment. To conduct this analysis, we evaluated the relative reinforcing value of those same stimuli depicted in video format and then compared results to results obtained during the reinforcer assessment for tangible stimuli. For all five participants, stimuli identified as highly preferred functioned as reinforcers, and four of five participants, responding during the reinforcer assessment was similar in the presence of tangible stimuli and videos depicting those stimuli.     

Effects of relative reinforcer frequency on complex color detection

Pigeons were trained under a discrete-trials detection procedure in which one of a set of color stimuli was presented on the center key and a single response turned off the stimulus and illuminated two side keys. Single responses to one or the other side key produced occasional reinforcers depending on the value of the color stimulus. In Experiment 1, one color-stimulus set comprised 559, 564, 569, and 574 nm, and right-key pecks were occasionally reinforced following presentations of members of this set. The other stimulus set comprised 579, 584, 589, and 594 nm, and left-key pecks were occasionally reinforced following presentations of members of this set. Across seven experimental conditions, the left/(left + right) relative reinforcer frequency was varied from .1 to .9. In Experiment 2, one stimulus set contained only one member, 574 nm, and right-key responses were occasionally reinforced following its presentation. Over 12 experimental conditions, two manipulations were carried out. First, the number of stimuli comprising the other stimulus set was increased from one (579 nm) to two (579 and 584 nm) to three (579, 584, and 589 nm) and to four (579, 584, 589, and 594 nm), and left-key responses were reinforced occasionally following center-key presentations of members of this set. Second, for each stimulus combination, the left/(left + right) relative reinforcer frequency was varied from .1 to .5 to .9 across three experimental conditions. The principal finding of Experiments 1 and 2 was that reinforcers and stimuli interacted in their effects on behavior. In Experiment 3, pairs of adjacent stimuli (5 nm apart) in the range 559 to 594 nm were presented in each experimental condition, and the left/(left + right) relative reinforcer frequency was held constant at .5. The data from all three experiments were analyzed according to a detection model describing performance in multiple-stimulus two-response procedures. This model provided independent measures of stimulus discriminability, contingency discriminability, and bias. The analysis showed that (a) consistent with the color-naming function, pigeons were better able to discriminate between higher nanometer values than lower nanometer values; (b) their ability to discriminate between the stimuli was independent of the number of wavelengths comprising each stimulus set; (c) they allocated delivered reinforcers very accurately to the previously emitted response; and (d) no consistent biases emerged.