Evaluating the efficacy of pictorial preference assessments with children who engage in food selectivity

Preference assessments are used in practice with individuals who engage in food refusal and selectivity to identify foods that a child will readily consume before assessment and treatment. Traditional edible preference assessments may be challenging for children who engage in food refusal or selectivity as the child may not consume foods, but rather engage in inappropriate mealtime behavior simply due to the presence of food. Alternative modality preference assessments, such as pictorial, may offer benefits compared to traditional preference assessment formats (e.g., stimulus preference assessment and paired-stimulus preference assessment). The use of pictures may reduce any evocative effects of the presence of food and result in choice-making without inappropriate mealtime behavior. Experiment 1 assessed the correspondence between the hierarchies yielded from pictorial preference assessments (with and without access) to a standard edible preference assessment. Experiment 2 evaluated the accuracy of each preference assessment by presenting foods identified as preferred and non-preferred to determine if the child would accept them. Results suggested that pictorial preference assessments with access corresponded the most with the traditional edible preference assessment. Also, for one individual, the traditional preference assessment did not accurately identify foods that the participant would consume, while the pictorial preference assessment without access yielded a hierarchy.     

Assessing object-to-picture and picture-to-object matching as prerequisite skills for pictorial preference assessments

Tangible and pictorial paired-stimulus (PPS) preference assessments were compared for 6 individuals with developmental disabilities. During tangible and PPS assessments, two edible items or photographs were presented on each trial, respectively, and approach responses were recorded. Both assessments yielded similar preference hierarchies for 3 participants who could match pictures and objects but different hierarchies for 3 participants who could not. Reinforcer assessments verified that items identified as high preference on PPS assessments functioned as reinforcers only for participants with matching skills.     

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

The generality of the findings reported by DeLeon, Iwata, and Roscoe (1997) was examined by conducting two stimulus-choice preference assessments, the second of which evaluated low-ranked items from the initial assessment. Results for the 2 participants suggested that supplementary assessments of low-ranked items may be useful for identifying a wider variety of reinforcing stimuli.     

A comparison of picture and GIF-based preference assessments for social interaction

Researchers have recently begun to evaluate video-based preference assessments; however, only two studies have evaluated the efficacy of this preference assessment modality in assessing preference for social interactions. Four individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder who could not match pictures or graphic-interchange-format images (GIFs) of social interactions to in vivo interaction participated. We compared picture and GIF-based paired-stimulus preference assessments for social interaction and evaluated the preference assessment hierarchies by conducting a concurrent-operant reinforcer assessment including all social interactions. The GIF-based preference assessment produced similar hierarchies to the reinforcer assessment for all participants, whereas the picture-based preference assessments produced similar hierarchies to the reinforcer assessment for 2 of 4 subjects. Additionally, we conducted a modality preference assessment in which we evaluated participants' preference for viewing GIFs or pictures of social interactions, and found that 3 out of 4 subjects displayed a preference for GIFs.     

Relative versus absolute reinforcement effects: implications for preference assessments

We compared results obtained in two previous studies on reinforcer identification (Fisher et al., 1992; Pace, Ivancic, Edwards, Iwata, & Page, 1985) by combining methodologies from both studies. Eight individuals with mental retardation participated. During Phase 1, two preference assessments were conducted, one in which stimuli were presented singly (SS method) and one in which stimuli were presented in pairs (PS method). Based on these results, two types of stimuli were identified for each participant: High-preference (HP) stimuli were those selected on 75% or more trials during both preference assessments; low-preference (LP) stimuli were those selected on 100% of the SS trials but on 25% or fewer of the PS trials. During Phase 2, the reinforcing effects of HP and LP stimuli were evaluated in reversal designs under two test conditions: concurrent and single schedules of continuous reinforcement. Two response options were available under the concurrent-schedule condition: One response produced access to the HP stimulus; the other produced access to the LP stimulus. Only one response option was available under the single-schedule condition, and that response produced access only to the LP stimulus. Results indicated that 7 of the 8 participants consistently showed preference for the HP stimulus under the concurrent schedule. However, when only the LP stimulus was available during the single-schedule condition, response rates for 6 of the 7 participants were as high as those observed for the HP stimulus during the concurrent-schedule condition (1 participant showed no reinforcement effect). These results indicate that, although the concurrent-schedule procedure is well suited to the assessment of relative reinforcement effects (preference for one reinforcer over another), absolute reinforcement effects associated with a given stimulus may be best examined under single-schedule conditions.     

Assessing the efficacy of pictorial preference assessments for children with developmental disabilities

Past research has demonstrated that pictorial preference assessments can predict subsequent reinforcement effects for individuals with developmental disabilities only when access to the selected stimulus is provided contingent on a pictorial selection. The purpose of the present investigation was to assess more comprehensively the feasibility of the pictorial format with children with developmental disabilities. In Experiment 1, prerequisite skill assessments were conducted, and the role of a contingent reinforcer was assessed by comparing the results from the pictorial assessment without contingent access to a reinforcer assessment. If contingent access was found to be necessary, the effects of schedule thinning were evaluated to determine whether a pictorial format could be made more practical in Experiment 2. The pictorial format without contingent access was successful with only some participants. However, schedule thinning was found to be an effective method to establish conditioned reinforcement properties for pictorial stimuli to create a more practical assessment for a subset of participants.     

Using stimulus preference assessments to identify preferred break environments

A pictorial preference assessment was conducted for 2 individuals with autism who had programmed breaks in their behavior plans. Assessed break environments were individualized, based on indirect assessments and direct observations. The most highly (HP) and least preferred (LP) environments and a control with no associated break were included in a subsequent reinforcer assessment using a concurrent‐chains arrangement within a reversal design. Participants selected a multitask sequence (initial link) associated with one of the break environments. Phase A evaluated the reinforcing properties of all three breaks; the HP was removed in Phase B. Both participants allocated more responding to HP than LP, and to LP than control, suggesting that breaks functioned as reinforcers. The results indicated that preference assessment technology can be used to identify highly preferred breaks that function as reinforcers. Social validity measures indicated that the individuals' clinicians found the results useful for future clinical programming.     

An examination of stimulus technology level and preference displacement during multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessments

Researchers have observed that preference for edible items may displace preference for leisure items when items from the stimulus classes are assessed together within multiple stimulus without replacement (MSWO) preference assessments. The current study extends previous research by examining patterns of preference and displacement when assessing preference for high-tech and low-tech leisure items. We conducted three separate MSWO preference assessments; one assessing low-tech items, another assessing high-tech items, and a combined assessment (using the top four high- and low-tech items from the previous assessments) to test for displacement. Preference for high-tech items fully or partially displaced preference for low-tech items in five of eight participants. We then conducted concurrent and single operant reinforcer assessments using the highly preferred high-tech and low-tech items. Reinforcer assessment results demonstrated similar levels of responding for the highest preferred high-tech and low-tech items, indicating that combining high- and low-tech items within preference assessments may influence the validity of results.     

Evaluation of an efficient method for training staff to implement stimulus preference assessments

We used a brief training procedure that incorporated feedback and role-play practice to train staff members to conduct stimulus preference assessments, and we used group-comparison methods to evaluate the effects of training. Staff members were trained to implement the multiple-stimulus-without-replacement assessment in a single session and the paired-stimulus method in another single session. In all 16 cases (2 assessments for 8 trainees), correct responding increased to over 80% accuracy; in 14 of those 16 cases, it increased to over 90% accuracy. Thus, training produced mastery-level performance in a single training session in almost all cases.     

Evaluating the predictive validity of a single stimulus engagement preference assessment.

Most preference assessments require individuals to choose among two or more stimuli. More recently, the duration of engagement with items has been used as an index of preference. In the current study, the predictive validity of a single stimulus engagement (SSE) preference assessment was evaluated with 4 individuals. Stimuli were presented singly for a brief period while engagement with that stimulus was recorded. Although SSE preference rankings closely matched paired stimulus preference assessment rankings for only 2 of the 4 participants, relative preference rankings based on duration of engagement predicted relative reinforcer effectiveness for all participants in a subsequent concurrent‐schedule reinforcer assessment. The SSE procedure took less time to administer than the paired stimulus procedure but produced less stable preference rankings across administrations. The SSE procedure may be appropriate for individuals who have difficulty selecting one stimulus from among two or more stimuli, and it may be well suited for evaluating activities that are difficult to present in a paired stimulus format.     

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.     

A comparison of verbal and tangible stimulus preference assessments

Tangible preference assessments were compared with verbal preference assessments for 6 individuals with mental retardation, behavior disorders, or both. In the tangible assessment, items were placed in front of the participant. In the verbal assessment, participants were asked, “Do you want X or Y?” and the items were not present. The two assessments yielded similar high‐preference items for 4 of the 6 participants. The verbal assessment was typically completed in less time than the tangible assessment.     

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.     

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

Several brief preference assessments have recently been developed to identify reinforcers for individuals with developmental disabilities. One purported advantage of brief assessments is that they can be administered frequently, thus accommodating shifts in preference and presumably enhancing reinforcement effects. In this study, we initially conducted lengthy paired‐choice preference assessments and identified a hierarchy of preferred items for 5 individuals with developmental disabilities. Subsequently, brief multiple‐stimulus‐without‐replacement assessments using the same items were completed each day prior to work sessions. On days when results of the daily brief assessment differed from the one‐time lengthy assessment, the relative reinforcing effects of the top items from each assessment were compared in a concurrent‐schedule arrangement. The results revealed that when the two assessments differed, participants generally allocated more responses to the task associated with the daily top‐ranked item.     

Evaluating the relative effects of feedback and contingent money for staff training of stimulus preference assessments

Performance feedback has facilitated the acquisition and maintenance of a wide range of behaviors (e.g., health-care routines, seat-belt use). Most researchers have attributed the effectiveness of performance feedback to (a) its discriminative functions, (b) its reinforcing functions, or (c) the combination of the two. In this study, we attempted to evaluate the relative contributions of the discriminative and reinforcing functions of performance feedback by comparing a condition in which the discriminative functions were maximized and the reinforcing functions were minimized (i.e., performance-specific instructions without contingent money) with one in which the reinforcing functions were maximized and the discriminative functions were minimized (i.e., contingent money with no performance-specific instructions). We compared the effects of these two conditions on the acquisition of skills involved in conducting two commonly used preference assessments. Results showed that acquisition of these skills occurred primarily in the condition with performance-specific instruction without contingent money, suggesting that the delivery of performance-specific instructions was critical to skill acquisition, whereas the delivery of contingent money had little effect.     

Duration-based measures of preference for vocational tasks

We compared results from two preference assessments with data on extended performance of vocational tasks by 4 participants with developmental disabilities. All participants engaged in one task exclusively when seven tasks were available concurrently during a 5-min multiple-stimulus assessment. By contrast, all participants exhibited high levels of engagement in most tasks when the tasks were presented singly for 5 min, and these data showed a high degree of correspondence with those obtained during extended (60-min) vocational assessments.     

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.