IDENTIFYING REINFORCERS FOR PERSONS WITH PROFOUND HANDICAPS: STAFF OPINION VERSUS SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF PREFERENCES

We evaluated a systematic means of determining stimulus preferences among seven profoundly handicapped persons. Preferences were determined by observing student approach responses to individual stimuli. Results indicated that there were differential stimulus preferences across the multiply handicapped participants. However, results of the systematic assessment did not coincide with the results of a more traditional, caregiver-opinion method of assessing student preferences. A second experiment was then conducted with five participants to evaluate whether stimuli that were assessed to consistently represent preferences would function as reinforcers in skill training programs. Results indicated that stimuli that were systematically assessed to represent student preferences typically functioned as reinforcers when applied contingently. However, preferred stimuli as reflected by caregiver opinion did not function as reinforcers unless those stimuli were also preferred on the systematic assessment. Results are discussed in terms of assisting profoundly handicapped persons by (a) improving the effectiveness of training programs by increasing the likelihood of using stimuli that have reinforcing value and (b) increasing the overall quality of life by providing preferred stimuli in the routine living environment.     

ASSESSING FOOD PREFERENCES AMONG PERSONS WITH PROFOUND MENTAL RETARDATION: PROVIDING OPPORTUNITIES TO MAKE CHOICES

Increased attention has been directed recently to assisting persons with severe handicaps to express preferences concerning events in their lives. We evaluated a program for assessing choice-making skills to provide opportunities for persons with profound mental retardation to express food and drink preferences. In Experiment 1, the assessment procedure involving repeated, paired-item presentations resulted in active choice making and the identification of preferences for all 5 participants. Results also indicated that caregiver opinion was not predictive of participant food and drink preferences. A survey of service providers supported the importance of meal-related choices in this population. In Experiment 2, the practicality of the assessment procedure was supported by demonstrating that (a) routine caregivers could apply the procedure with appropriate supervision to provide choice opportunities, and (b) results of the procedure were predictive of participant choices when a less structured and more normal opportunity to express a preference was provided during regular mealtimes. Results are discussed in terms of extending the developing technology of preference and reinforcer identification to other important areas for persons with severe disabilities.     

ASSESSMENT OF STIMULUS PREFERENCE AND REINFORCER VALUE WITH PROFOUNDLY RETARDED INDIVIDUALS

We evaluated a procedure for identifying potential reinforcers with profoundly retarded individuals. In Experiment 1, six persons were repeatedly exposed to 16 stimuli, and approach behaviors to each stimulus were used to identify preferred and nonpreferred stimuli. In Experiment 2, we examined the reinforcing properties of preferred and nonpreferred stimuli by delivering them contingently on the occurrence of arbitrarily selected responses. Results revealed that the preferred stimulus conditions typically produced higher rates of responding than did either the baseline or the nonpreferred stimulus conditions, suggesting that the procedure can be used to assess reinforcer value for individuals with limited behavioral repertoires.     

EVALUATION OF A BRIEF STIMULUS PREFERENCE ASSESSMENT

We evaluated the utility of a brief (5-min) stimulus preference assessment for individuals with developmental disabilities. Participants had noncontingent (free) access to an array of stimuli and could interact with any of the stimuli at any time. Stimuli were never withdrawn or withheld from the participants during a 5-min session. In Experiment 1, the brief preference assessment was conducted for 10 participants to identify differentially preferred stimuli, and reinforcer assessments were conducted to test the reinforcing efficacy of those stimuli identified as highly preferred. In Experiment 2, a comparison was conducted between the brief preference assessment and a commonly used paired-stimulus preference assessment. Collectively, results demonstrated that the brief preference assessment identified stimuli that functioned as reinforcers for a simple operant response, identified preferred stimuli that were differentially effective as reinforcers compared to nonpreferred stimuli, was associated with fewer problem behaviors, and required less time to complete than a commonly used paired-stimulus preference assessment.     

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

Teachers were asked to identify and rank 10 preferred stimuli for 9 toddlers, and a hierarchy of preference for these items was determined via a direct preference assessment. The reinforcing efficacy of the most highly preferred items identified by each method was evaluated concurrently in a reinforcer assessment. The reinforcer assessment showed that all stimuli identified as highly preferred via the direct preference assessment and teacher rankings functioned as reinforcers. The highest ranked stimuli in the direct assessment were more reinforcing than the teachers' top-ranked stimuli for 5 of 9 participants, whereas the teachers' top-ranked stimulus was more reinforcing than the highest ranked stimulus of the direct assessment for only 1 child. A strong positive correlation between rankings generated through the two assessments was identified for only 1 of the 9 participants. Despite poor correspondence between rankings generated through the teacher interview and direct preference assessment, results of the reinforcer assessment suggest that both methods are effective in identifying reinforcers for toddlers.     

USING A CHOICE ASSESSMENT TO PREDICT REINFORCER EFFECTIVENESS

A choice assessment has been found to be a more accurate method of identifying preferences than is single-item presentation. However, it is not clear whether the effectiveness of reinforcement varies positively with the degree of preference (i.e., whether the relative preference based on the results of a choice assessment predicts relative reinforcer effectiveness). In the current study, we attempted to address this question by categorizing stimuli as high, middle, and low preference based on the results of a choice assessment, and then comparing the reinforcing effectiveness of these stimuli using a concurrent operants paradigm. High-preference stimuli consistently functioned as reinforcers for all 4 clients. Middle-preference stimuli functioned as reinforcers for 2 clients, but only when compared with low-preference stimuli. Low-preference stimuli did not function as reinforcers when compared to high- and middle-preference stimuli. These results suggest that a choice assessment can be used to predict the relative reinforcing value of various stimuli, which, in turn, may help to improve programs for clients with severe to profound disabilities.     

TRAINING STUDENTS WITH PROFOUND OR MULTIPLE HANDICAPS TO MAKE REQUESTS VIA MICROSWITCHES

In a series of three experiments, we evaluated the use of microswitches as a means for students with profound, multiple handicaps to demonstrate preferences between toys and to make requests for specific activities. In Experiment 1, 5 students learned to demonstrate toy preferences by using microswitches to activate battery-operated toys. Experiment 2 was conducted to evaluate the students' preferences for social attention. Microswitches were used to activate prerecorded messages that signaled the classroom teacher to attend to the students. In Experiment 3, the students used the switches and prerecorded messages to make specific requests of educational staff in school and community settings. Results of these experiments, evaluated within multiple baseline, alternating treatments, and simultaneous treatments designs, indicated that these students could request specific activities. Results are discussed with respect to the continued use of microswitches and to program development.     

INCREASING INDICES OF HAPPINESS AMONG PEOPLE WITH PROFOUND MULTIPLE DISABILITIES: A PROGRAM REPLICATION AND COMPONENT ANALYSIS

We replicated a program to increase indices of happiness among people with profound multiple disabilities and conducted a component analysis of the program. The program involved presentation and contingent withdrawal of stimuli that had been identified as preferred based on preference assessments and staff opinion. The program was implemented with 3 adult students and was accompanied by increased happiness indices for each student. Subsequent implementation of the two types of stimuli indicated that preferred stimuli based on preference assessments were more consistently accompanied by increased happiness indices than were preferred stimuli based on staff opinion. Social validity measures supported the definition of happiness, in that raters' subjective opinions of the students' happiness coincided with the observed happiness indices. Results are discussed regarding the importance and practical implications of using preference assessments for determining stimuli for increasing happiness indices. Future research areas are suggested, focusing on increasing happiness and other quality-of-life indicators during the daily routines of people with profound disabilities.     

Identifying work preferences among supported workers with severe disabilities: efficiency and accuracy of a preference‐assessment protocol

Despite considerable research on assessing preferences among people with severe disabilities, relatively little investigatory attention has been directed to preferences in supported work situations. We evaluated a protocol for identifying work preferences among adults with severe disabilities in supported jobs. The protocol involved obtaining opinions of support staff regarding most and least preferred tasks of a supported worker, conducting a multi‐task preference assessment and then if necessary, a paired‐task assessment for workers for whom the former assessment did not reveal work preferences. For the 12 participating workers, the multi‐task assessment revealed preferences for 7 of the workers and subsequently, the paired‐task assessment revealed preferences for 4 of the 5 remaining workers. The former assessment required 40% less time than the latter. Staff opinion required much less time to obtain, but accurately identified preferences (based on validation through systematic assessment) only somewhat consistently. Results are discussed regarding guidelines for efficiently identifying supported work preferences, and future research areas are noted for developing more definitive guidelines. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Evaluation of absolute and relative reinforcer value using progressive-ratio schedules

We evaluated behavior exhibited by individuals with developmental disabilities using progressive-ratio (PR) schedules. High- and low-preference stimuli were determined based on the results of a paired-stimulus preference assessment and were evaluated in subsequent reinforcer and PR assessments using concurrent and single schedules of presentation. In Experiment 1, results showed that for 2 of 3 participants, stimuli determined to be low-preference functioned as reinforcers when evaluated independent of high-preference stimuli. Further, the results from Experiment 2 showed that low-preference stimuli also functioned as reinforcers under gradually increasing PR requirements. Results suggest that for cases in which a high-preference stimulus is unavailable or impractical, the contingent delivery of relatively less preferred stimuli may maintain appropriate behavior, even as schedule requirements increase.     

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.     

Assessing preferred work among adults with autism beginning supported jobs: identification of constant and alternating task preferences

We evaluated a multiple‐stimulus assessment for identifying work preferences among adults with autism prior to beginning supported jobs. Initially, a prework assessment focused on identifying preferences across different work tasks. Eight preference assessments involving office‐cleaning tasks were conducted with five supported workers. Results of five assessments involving three individuals indicated respective workers had a strong preference for one work task. On three assessments involving three workers and different cleaning tasks, weak preferences for given tasks were identified. Next, choices between more‐ and less‐preferred tasks were provided during the daily job routine. Workers who had a strong preference on the prework assessment consistently chose the previously assessed, more preferred task during the daily job. Workers who had a weak preference always chose the more preferred task on the first choice of the work day, and then alternated between tasks on 71% of subsequent choice opportunities. Results appear to support the utility of the prework, multiple‐stimulus assessment for predicting preferred tasks among supported workers with autism when the assessment identifies strong preferences. Results also offer some support for predicting a preference to alternate tasks when the assessment identifies weak preferences for respective work tasks. Implications of the results are discussed in terms of developing work routines within community jobs for adults with autism that are more in accordance with their work preferences than traditional job placement practices. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

EFFECTS OF SUBJECT- VERSUS EXPERIMENTER-SELECTED REINFORCERS ON THE BEHAVIOR OF INDIVIDUALS WITH PROFOUND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES

Results from a number of studies have shown that individuals with profound developmental disabilities often show differential approach behavior to stimuli presented in a variety of formats, and that such behavior is a reasonably good predictor of reinforcement effects when these “preferred” stimuli are used subsequently in a contingent arrangement. Recent data suggest that reinforcement effects may be enhanced further by allowing individuals to select, just prior to training sessions, which (of several) preferred stimuli would be used as reinforcers, but whether this method is superior to one based on selection by a teacher or therapist has not been adequately addressed. We compared the effects of these two methods of reinforcer selection on rates of responding on a free-operant task, using stimuli previously identified as potential reinforcers. Results obtained with 4 subjects indicated little or no difference in reinforcement effects when stimuli were selected by subjects rather than experimenters. Implications of these results with respect to choice and its relation to reinforcement are discussed.     

Superordinate categorization via learned stimulus equivalence: quantity of reinforcement, hedonic value, and the nature of the mediator

Three experiments examined superordinate categorization via stimulus equivalence training in pigeons. Experiment 1 established superordinate categories by association with a common number of food pellet reinforcers, plus it established generalization to novel photographic stimuli. Experiment 2 documented generalization of choice responding from stimuli signaling different numbers of food pellets to stimuli signaling different delays to food reinforcement. Experiment 3 indicated that different numbers of food pellets did not substitute as discriminative stimuli for the photographic stimuli with which the food pellets had been paired. The collective results suggest that the effective mediator of superordinate categories that are established via learned stimulus equivalence is not likely to be an accurate representation of the reinforcer, neither is it likely to be a distinctive response that is made to the discriminative stimulus. Motivational or emotional mediation is a more likely account.     

ASSESSMENT OF PREFERENCE FOR VARIED VERSUS CONSTANT REINFORCERS

One method that has been demonstrated to improve the effectiveness of reinforcement is stimulus (reinforcer) variation (Egel, 1980). Egel found that bar pressing increased and responding occurred more rapidly during varied reinforcement than during constant reinforcement when identical stimuli were used across phases for 10 individuals with autism. The purpose of the current investigation was to assess the preferences of 7 individuals for varied presentation of slightly lower quality stimuli relative to constant access to the highest quality stimulus. Varied presentation was preferred over constant reinforcer presentation with 4 participants, and the opposite was true for 2 participants. One participant did not demonstrate a preference. These results suggest that stimulus variation may allow less preferred reinforcers to compete effectively with a more highly preferred reinforcer for some individuals.     

A prework assessment of task preferences among adults with autism beginning a supported job

A prework paired-task assessment was evaluated for identifying work preferences among 3 adults with autism beginning a supported job. When the workers began the job, choices were provided between more and less preferred tasks (determined by previous assessment). Results supported the assessment for identifying single task preferences, but did not reveal preferences of 2 workers for alternate tasks. Results are discussed in terms of evaluating other prework assessments that may reveal task-alternation preferences.     

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.     

Multiple‐stimulus preference assessments: a comparison of free‐operant and restricted‐operant formats

We compared free‐operant and restricted‐operant multiple‐stimulus preference assessments with three children diagnosed with mental retardation. The methods produced comparable results, although the free‐operant assessment identified fewer potential reinforcers than the restricted‐operant assessment. The highest‐ and lowest‐ranked stimuli from both methods were subsequently evaluated in a concurrent‐operants reinforcer assessment. All participants engaged in behavior that resulted in access to the highest‐ranked stimuli the majority of the time, thus validating both preference assessment methods as effective in identifying reinforcers. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Further evaluation of the use of preference categories to identify novel reinforcers: A systematic replication

Preference assessments are frequently used to identify reinforcers for individuals with autism spectrum disorder and intellectual and developmental disabilities. Although well‐established procedures have been shown to identify preferred stimuli for individual items that can be used in skill acquisition and behavior reduction programs, little research has been conducted on identifying categories of preferred items. In this study, paired‐stimulus preference assessments were conducted with 4 individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Researchers classified the edible stimuli as belonging to 1 of 4 categories: chocolate (e.g., chocolate chips and M&M's^®), salty/crunchy (e.g., chips and crackers), gummy (e.g., Swedish Fish^® and Starburst^®), or fruit/vegetable (e.g., grape and apple). Preference hierarchies were identified for individual stimuli and for categories of stimuli. For all participants, at least 3 of the 4 most preferred items came from the same category. Novel items (i.e., items not included in the preference assessments) identified by the researchers as belonging to the high‐preference category functioned as effective reinforcers during subsequent reinforcer assessments for all participants. This finding suggests that clinicians could identify likely effective edible reinforcers based on an individual's categorical preference without explicit testing.     

TEACHING PERSONS WITH PROFOUND MULTIPLE HANDICAPS: A REVIEW OF THE EFFECTS OF BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH

The behavioral research on teaching individuals who have profound multiple handicaps is reviewed. The primary focus is on determining the degree to which behavioral research has demonstrated the teaching of meaningful skills to this population. Results of the review indicate that investigations have demonstrated, albeit inconsistently, that behavior change has resulted from contingency management interventions with persons who have profound multiple handicaps. However, there is little evidence that such interventions have resulted in meaningful behavior change according to currently accepted criteria for beneficially affecting the quality of life of persons with serious handicaps. Potential explanations for the lack of such evidence are offered, including the relative lack of research attention given to this issue, the possible ineffectiveness of the components of the technology applied, and possible ineffective application of the potentially effective technology. Suggestions for future research are discussed in terms of developing more effective educational and habilitative services for persons with profound multiple handicaps. In particular, we suggest research on a wider variety of behavioral teaching procedures, providing more comprehensive evaluations of the applications of procedures and developing treatment programs that do not focus solely on traditional skill acquisition.