Evaluating preference for and reinforcing efficacy of a therapy dog to increase verbal statements

The purpose of this study was to evaluate preference for and reinforcing efficacy of a therapy dog to increase verbal statements across different contingencies. Five children with autism spectrum disorder ages 3-8 years participated. Alternating treatments and reversal designs were used to compare conditions in which (a) a therapy dog was not present, (b) access to a therapy dog was noncontingent, (c) access to a therapy dog was contingent on interacting with a therapist, and (d) access to another preferred item was contingent on interacting with a therapist. Results varied across participants. Noncontingent access to the therapy dog slightly increased verbal statements for 1 participant. Contingent access to the therapy dog increased social interactions for 2 participants; however, this was the most effective intervention for only 1 participant. Practitioners should be aware that some clients may be better suited for interventions including therapy dogs than others.     

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

The effects of presession exposure to attention on responding during subsequent assessments of attention as a reinforcer were evaluated across three behavioral assessments. In Experiment 1, a contingent attention assessment condition was preceded by either a noncontingent attention condition (free play) or a contingent escape condition. In Experiment 2, a diverted attention with extinction condition was preceded by either an alone or a free-play condition. In Experiment 3, a two-choice preference assessment was preceded by either 10 min of free play or 10 min of playing alone. In each experiment, the participant responded differentially within the test condition according to the presence or absence of dense schedules of attention immediately prior to that condition. The results of this study show that events occurring immediately prior to an assessment condition can influence behavior within the assessment.     

Stability of daily preference across multiple individuals

Preference stability provides clues about the extent to which a clinician might be able to deliver a particular stimulus contingent on behavior as a reinforcer. Previous research has been somewhat mixed in terms of evidence for preference stability. Results of the current study are consistent with studies that have reported correlations between preference assessments, suggesting that preferences are relatively stable across time.     

EFFECTS OF REINFORCEMENT CHOICE ON TASK RESPONDING IN INDIVIDUALS WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES

The effects of reinforcement choice on task performance were examined with 6 individuals who had been diagnosed with severe to profound mental retardation. Five highly preferred items were identified for each participant via stimulus preference assessments. Participants then were exposed to choice and no-choice conditions that were alternated within reversal and multielement designs. During choice sessions, participants were permitted to select between two preferred stimuli contingent on responding. During no-choice sessions, the therapist delivered a single item contingent on responding. Preference for the stimuli was held constant across conditions by yoking the items delivered during no-choice sessions to those selected during the immediately preceding choice sessions. All participants exhibited similar rates of responding across choice and no-choice conditions. These findings indicate that for individuals with severe disabilities, access to choice may not improve task performance when highly preferred items are already incorporated into instructional programs.     

Some determinants of changes in preference over time

Results of longitudinal studies suggest that the stability of preferences varies across individuals, although it is unclear what variables account for these differences. We extended this work by conducting periodic assessments of preference for leisure activities over 3 to 6 months with 10 adults with developmental disabilities. Although previous research has collectively shown that preferences identified via repeated assessment are highly variable, our results showed that preferences were relatively stable for the majority (80%) of participants. In an attempt to identify some environmental determinants of shifts in preference, we provided extended daily access to high-preference items (preference-weakening manipulation) and paired access to low-preference items with social and edible putative reinforcers during brief sessions (preference-strengthening manipulation). Preference assessments continued over the course of these manipulations with 2 participants. Results showed that changes in preference across time could be produced systematically and suggest that naturally occurring changes in establishing operations or conditioning histories contribute to temporal shifts in preference. Implications for preference assessments, reinforcer usage, and planned attempts to change preferences are discussed.     

The effects of providing access to stimuli following choice making during vocal preference assessments

Two variations of a vocal paired-stimulus preference assessment were evaluated to determine whether the verbal reports of preference, given by individuals with developmental disabilities when no access to the activity was given, matched their verbal reports when access to the activity was given contingent on their choice. The results indicated different outcomes between the two methods for 6 of the 7 participants. Subsequent reinforcer assessments, conducted for 2 participants, showed that activities identified in the preference assessments that provided access contingent on selection resulted in more responding than did activities identified in the preference assessment that did not include access to items following their selection.     

Effects of reinforcer consumption and magnitude on response rates during noncontingent reinforcement

Results of previous research on the effects of noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) have been inconsistent when magnitude of reinforcement was manipulated. We attempted to clarify the influence of NCR magnitude by including additional controls. In Study 1, we examined the effects of reinforcer consumption time by comparing the same magnitude of NCR when session time was and was not corrected to account for reinforcer consumption. Lower response rates were observed when session time was not corrected, indicating that reinforcer consumption can suppress response rates. In Study 2, we first selected varying reinforcer magnitudes (small, medium, and large) on the basis of corrected response rates observed during a contingent reinforcement condition and then compared the effects of these magnitudes during NCR. One participant exhibited lower response rates when large-magnitude reinforcers were delivered; the other ceased responding altogether even when small-magnitude reinforcers were delivered. We also compared the effects of the same NCR magnitude (medium) during 10-min and 30-min sessions. Lower response rates were observed during 30-min sessions, indicating that the number of reinforcers consumed across a session can have the same effect as the number consumed per reinforcer delivery. These findings indicate that, even when response rate is corrected to account for reinforcer consumption, larger magnitudes of NCR (defined on either a per-delivery or per-session basis) result in lower response rates than do smaller magnitudes.     

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.     

Examination of the influence of contingency on changes in reinforcer value

This study examined how the amount of effort required to produce a reinforcer influenced subsequent preference for, and strength of, that reinforcer in 7 individuals with intellectual disabilities. Preference assessments identified four moderately preferred stimuli for each participant, and progressive-ratio (PR) analyses indexed reinforcer strength. Stimuli were then assigned to one of four conditions for 4 weeks: fixed-ratio (FR) 1 schedule, escalating FR schedule, yoked noncontingent (NCR) delivery, and restricted access. Preference assessments and PR schedules were then repeated to examine changes in selection percentages and PR break points. Selection percentages decreased for all NCR stimuli but increased for most of the restricted stimuli. There were no systematic changes in selection percentages for either of the contingent stimuli. Break points increased, on average, for all conditions, but the increase was highest for the restricted stimuli and lowest for the NCR stimuli. These results are discussed in relation to recent basic research addressing the influence of effort on stimulus value.     

Self-control in children with autism: response allocation during delays to reinforcement.

This study examined the use of a progressive‐delay schedule of reinforcement to increase self‐control and decrease disruptive behavior in children with autism. When initially given the choice between an immediate smaller reinforcer and a larger delayed reinforcer, all participants chose the smaller reinforcer. When access to the larger reinforcer required either no activity or engaging in a concurrent task during the delay, all participants demonstrated both self‐control and preference for a response requirement. Disruptive behavior decreased during delays that required a concurrent task compared to sessions without an activity requirement.     

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.     

A replication of preference displacement research in children with autism spectrum disorder

The purpose of this paper was to replicate previous research on preference displacement with edible and leisure stimuli. In the present study, the experimenters evaluated preference displacement in 25 children with autism spectrum disorder using combined multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessments that consisted of highly preferred edible and leisure stimuli. In addition, the experimenters used a block randomization procedure to evaluate if assessment order influenced displacement outcomes. The experimenters observed patterns of complete displacement by edible stimuli for four participants and complete displacement by leisure stimuli for two participants; assessment order did not influence outcomes. The results and implications are discussed.     

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.     

DOES CONTINGENT REINFORCEMENT STRENGTHEN OPERANT BEHAVIOR?

In Experiment 1, pigeons were trained to peck keys with equal food-reinforcement schedules in components that ended with either noncontingent or contingent transitions to a third component with a five-fold richer schedule. Response rates were higher in the initial component with contingent transitions, but resistance to prefeeding or extinction was not consistently greater. Experiment 2 also included noncontingent or contingent transitions to a signaled period of nonreinforcement. There was no effect of the contingency on transitions to nonreinforcement, but the difference in response rates maintained by contingent versus noncontingent transitions to the richer schedule was replicated. In addition, response rates were higher in components that preceded nonreinforcement than in components that preceded the richer schedule. However, resistance to extinction was greater for noncontingent transitions to the richer schedule than to nonreinforcement, implicating stimulus–reinforcer relations in the determination of resistance to change. Resistance to change was also somewhat greater for noncontingent than for contingent transitions to the richer schedule. The latter result, together with the results of Experiment 1 and related research, suggests that response-contingent reinforcement does not increase resistance to change.     

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

We evaluated a brief multiple-stimulus preference assessment within the context of an early intervention program for 3 children who had been diagnosed with autism. Subsequent curriculum-based reinforcer evaluations confirmed the predictions of the preference assessments. In addition, eight additional preference assessments that were conducted over a period of 1 month indicated generally stable preferences for 2 of the 3 participants.     

The effects of token procedures on a teacher's social contacts with her students

The effects of a token system on a teacher's rate of social contacts with her students were investigated in a public school kindergarten. A group of six children were observed daily during a 20-min handwriting lesson. The children were divided into two groups (A and B) of three children each. Five conditions were imposed sequentially: (1) baseline without tokens, (2) contingent tokens for Group A, noncontingent tokens for Group B, (3) contingent tokens for Group B, noncontingent tokens for Group A, (4) reinstatement of condition 2, and (5) contingent tokens for both groups. It was consistently observed that the teacher's rate of social contact was higher with the children receiving the contingent tokens than with those who received noncontingent tokens.     

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.     

A COMPARISON OF REINFORCER ASSESSMENT METHODS: THE UTILITY OF VERBAL AND PICTORIAL CHOICE PROCEDURES

We compared three methods of stimulus preference assessment for verbal children and specifically evaluated the utility of a verbal choice procedure for assessing relative reinforcer value. Using a token system, relative preference for five categories of reinforcers, representing 15 different stimuli, was assessed by three methods: a reinforcer survey, a verbal stimulus-choice questionnaire, and a pictorial stimulus-choice procedure. Results showed that the verbal and pictorial stimulus-choice assessments accurately identified high- and low-preference categories for 3 of 4 participants. Survey results alone often rated multiple categories as high preference, were less likely to identify low-preference categories, and were less likely to correspond with the results of a reinforcer assessment.     

Assessing preferences of individuals with developmental disabilities using alternative stimulus modalities: A systematic review

The purpose of this systematic review was to identify investigations comparing the efficacy of alternative modality (e.g., pictorial, verbal, video) stimulus preference assessments for individuals with developmental disabilities. We identified articles by searching peer‐reviewed journals using the PsycINFO and ERIC databases, conducting table of contents searches of common behavioral outlets, and conducting ancestral searches of recent reviews and practitioner summaries of preference assessment methodology. A total of 32 articles met our inclusion criteria. These studies were then coded across a variety of features to gain a better understanding of the efficacy of alternative format preference assessments for individuals with developmental disabilities. In addition, we reviewed this literature for the use of prerequisite‐skill assessments and contingent‐reinforcer access to further investigate the relation between these variables and the accuracy of pictorial, verbal, and video preference assessments. A variety of methodological concerns are discussed as well as suggestions for future research.     

THE TRAINING AND GENERALIZATION OF A CONVERSATIONAL SPEECH FORM IN NONVERBAL RETARDATES1

Differential reinforcement and imitation were used with two retarded children to train three sequential verbal responses associated with the display of a picture and questions related to that picture. Each response consisted of a three-word chain in sentence form; combined with verbal responses from the experimenter, this trained sequence formed a short conversational unit. Three experimenters measured the use of each sentence in settings different than the one in which training took place, and with pictures different than those used during training. Two types of generalization sessions were used: (1) General sessions, during which 10 pictures never used during training were displayed to the subject with reinforcement delivered on a noncontingent basis, and (2) Intermixed sessions, during which 10 pictures never used during training were displayed to the subject, but a picture having received training was also displayed, and correct responses to this picture were reinforced on a variable schedule. Both subjects learned the sentences being trained. However, little generalization was evident from this training when all experimenters conducted General probe sessions. Generalization occurred with one experimenter only after that experimenter conducted Intermixed probe sessions. Generalization to a third experimenter was then observed (i.e., after the first two experimenters had conducted Intermixed probe sessions) without the use of Intermixed probe sessions by this third experimenter.