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.     

A comparison of methods for assessing preference for social interactions

Researchers have evaluated a variety of methods for assessing preference for social interactions, and generally have found that such assessments accurately identify differentially reinforcing, preferred interactions. However, few researchers have compared methods for assessing preference for social interactions, and none have done so with participants across different skill levels. The current study compared the stability and validity of hierarchies produced by social interaction preference assessments (SIPA) and picture-based multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessments (MSWO) with 8 individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The MSWO most often produced valid hierarchies for participants who could match, identify, and tact pictures of social interactions and that the SIPA most often produced valid hierarchies for participants who could not identify or tact pictures of social interactions. A vocal paired-stimulus preference assessment (PSPA) was also conducted with a subset of participants who communicated vocally, and it produced valid hierarchies. Considerations and recommendations for selecting a method of assessing preference for social interactions are discussed.     

An analysis of the value of token reinforcement using a multiple-schedule assessment

Token systems are widely used in clinical settings, necessitating the development of methods to evaluate the reinforcing value of these systems. In the current paper, we replicated the use of a multiple-schedule reinforcer assessment (MSA; Smaby, MacDonald, Ahearn, & Dube, 2007) to evaluate the components of a token economy system for 4 learners with autism. Token systems had reinforcing value similar to primary reinforcers for 2 of the 4 learners, but resulted in lower rates of responding than primary reinforcers for the other 2 learners. Differentiated responding across learners may warrant variation in clinical recommendations on the use of tokens. The results of this study support formal assessment of token system effectiveness, and the MSA procedure provides an efficient method by which to conduct such assessments.     

A comparison of multiple reinforcer assessments to identify the function of maladaptive behavior

Functional analysis results indicated that maladaptive behaviors displayed by a 25-year-old man with profound mental retardation were maintained by attention from caregivers and possibly, to a lesser degree, by access to tangible items. A concurrent-schedules procedure was then used to study the relative reinforcing value for maladaptive behavior of attention versus tangible items. Results of the concurrent-schedules assessment and subsequent functional communication training indicated that preference for attention versus access to a tangible object varied.     

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.     

An evaluation of a brief multiple-stimulus preference assessment with adolescents with emotional-behavioral disorders in an educational setting

Brief multiple-stimulus-without-replacement (MSWO) preference assessments were conducted with 3 adolescent boys with emotional-behavioral disorders in the context of their public school educational program. The reinforcing effects of stimuli identified as high, medium, and low preference were then evaluated using an alternating treatments design in which, following an initial baseline, stimuli were delivered contingent on on-task behavior. High-preference stimuli produced the highest percentages of on-task behavior for all 3 participants.     

Use of a lag differential reinforcement contingency to increase varied selections of classroom activities

The present study evaluated the effects of a lag differential reinforcement contingency on 2 students' activity selections using reversal designs. Results showed that the lag contingency was responsible for promoting increased novel selections, engagement in diverse activities, and greater progress with respect to programmed academic activities.     

Rate of conditioned reinforcement affects observing rate but not resistance to change

The effects of rate of conditioned reinforcement on the resistance to change of operant behavior have not been examined. In addition, the effects of rate of conditioned reinforcement on the rate of observing have not been adequately examined. In two experiments, a multiple schedule of observing-response procedures was used to examine the effects of rate of conditioned reinforcement on observing rates and resistance to change. In a rich component, observing responses produced a higher frequency of stimuli correlated with alternating periods of random-interval schedule primary reinforcement or extinction. In a lean component, observing responses produced similar schedule-correlated stimuli but at a lower frequency. The rate of primary reinforcement in both components was the same. In Experiment 1, a 4:1 ratio of stimulus production was arranged by the rich and lean components. In Experiment 2, the ratio of stimulus production rates was increased to 6:1. In both experiments, observing rates were higher in the rich component than in the lean component. Disruptions in observing produced by presession feeding, extinction of observing responses, and response-independent food deliveries during intercomponent intervals usually were similar in the rich and lean components. When differences in resistance to change did occur, observing tended to be more resistant to change in the lean component. If resistance to change is accepted as a more appropriate measure of response strength than absolute response rates, then the present results provide no evidence that higher rates of stimuli generally considered to function as conditioned reinforcers engender greater response strength.     

The role of the response-reinforcer relation in delay-of-reinforcement effects

The role of the response-reinforcer relation in maintaining operant behavior under conditions of delayed reinforcement was investigated by using a two-operandum (i.e., two-key) procedure with pigeons. Responding on one key was reinforced under a tandem variable-interval differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior (tandem VI DRO) schedule. The schedule defined a resetting unsignaled delay-of-reinforcement procedure in that a response was required when the interfood interval of the VI schedule lapsed, but further responding during the DRO component on either key reset the time interval. This ensured a fixed delay duration between any response and reinforcement. Responding on another key, physically identical to the first one except for spatial location, otherwise was without consequence. The location of the key correlated with the delay-of-reinforcement procedure varied between sessions according to a semirandom sequence. Differences in response rates between the two keys were greater, with proportionally higher rates on the key correlated with the delay-of-reinforcement procedure, the longer the delay-of-reinforcement procedure remained correlated with the same key. Differences in responding on the two keys also increased within individual sessions. These results suggest that the response-reinforcer relation is the primary determinant of responding when responding is acquired and maintained with delayed reinforcement.