Methodology to select solutions for multiobjective optimization problems: Weighted stress function method

The weighted stress function method is proposed here as a new way of identifying the best solution from a set of nondominated solutions according to the decision maker's preferences, expressed in terms of weights. The method was tested using several benchmark problems from the literature, and the results obtained were compared with those of other methods, namely, the reference point evolutionary multiobjective optimization (EMO), the weighted Tchebycheff metric, and a goal programming method. The weighted stress function method can be seen to exhibit a more direct correspondence between the weights set by the decision maker and the final solutions obtained than the other methods tested.     

Response competition and stimulus preference in the treatment of automatically reinforced behavior: a comparison

Clinicians are particularly challenged by the development of interventions for behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement because reinforcers that maintain the responses often cannot be directly observed or manipulated. Researchers have conducted either preference assessments or competing items assessments when developing effective treatments for behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement. However, interventions based on these assessments have not been directly compared. The current study evaluated procedures to make such a comparison. High-competition items resulted in greater reductions in vocal stereotypy than did high-preference items for a preschool boy with autism.     

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.     

Preference for fluent versus disfluent work schedules

Two studies were conducted that examined the preference of a student diagnosed with a brain injury. In Study 1, a preference assessment was followed by a three-choice concurrent-operants reinforcer assessment. Two choices resulted in access to preferred activities for completing work, and a third choice resulted in access to nothing (i.e., no activity). Unpredictably, the participant consistently chose the no-activity option. Study 2 examined why this student preferred work associated with no activity over preferred activities. Through a variety of concurrent-operants procedures, it was determined that she preferred fluent work followed by reinforcers rather than work that was broken up by access to preferred activities. Implications for research on preference are discussed.     

Restricted interests and teacher presentation of items

Restricted and repetitive behavior (RRB) is more pervasive, prevalent, frequent, and severe in individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) than in their typical peers. One subtype of RRB is restricted interests in items or activities, which is evident in the manner in which individuals engage with items (e.g., repetitious wheel spinning), the types of items or activities they select (e.g., preoccupation with a phone book), or the range of items or activities they select (i.e., narrow range of items). We sought to describe the relation between restricted interests and teacher presentation of items. Overall, we observed 5 teachers interacting with 2 pairs of students diagnosed with an ASD. Each pair included 1 student with restricted interests. During these observations, teachers were free to present any items from an array of 4 stimuli selected by experimenters. We recorded student responses to teacher presentation of items and analyzed the data to determine the relation between teacher presentation of items and the consequences for presentation provided by the students. Teacher presentation of items corresponded with differential responses provided by students with ASD, and those with restricted preferences experienced a narrower array of items.     

Reinforcement: Food Signals the Time and Location of Future Food

It has long been understood that food deliveries may act as signals of future food location, and not only as strengtheners of prefood responding as the law of effect suggests. Recent research has taken this idea further—the main effect of food deliveries, or other “reinforcers”, may be signaling rather than strengthening. The present experiment investigated the ability of food deliveries to signal food contingencies across time after food. In Phase 1, the next food delivery was always equally likely to be arranged for a left‐ or a right‐key response. Conditions were arranged such that the next food delivery was likely to occur either sooner on the left (or right) key, or sooner on the just‐productive (or not‐just‐productive) key. In Phase 2, similar contingencies were arranged, but the last‐food location was signaled by a red keylight. Preference, measured in 2‐s bins across interfood intervals, was jointly controlled by the likely time and location of the next food delivery. In Phase 1, when any food delivery signaled a likely sooner next food delivery on a particular key, postfood preference was strongly toward that key, and moved toward the other key across the interreinforcer interval. In other conditions in which food delivery on the two keys signaled different subsequent contingencies, postfood preference was less extreme, and quickly moved toward indifference. In Phase 2, in all three conditions, initial preference was strongly toward the likely‐sooner food key, and moved to the other key across the interfood interval. In both phases, at a more extended level of analysis, sequences of same‐key food deliveries caused a small increase in preference for the just‐productive key, suggesting the presence of a “reinforcement effect”, albeit one that was very small.     

Personality correlates of party preference: The Big Five in five big European countries

The Big Five Model was used to assess the role of personality traits in orienting voting choice across five European countries (n = 1288). Findings from Italy, Spain, Germany, Greece, and Poland showed that the Big Five were linked to party preference in theoretically consistent ways. Traits had substantial effects on voting, whereas the socio-demographic characteristics of gender, age, income, and educational level had weaker influences. In each country, voters’ traits are seemingly congruent with the policies of their preferred party. The Openness trait has been shown to be the most generalizable predictor of party preference across the examined cultures. Conscientiousness was also a valid predictor, although its effect was less robust and replicable. Similarities and differences across countries were discussed and linked to the nature of the respective political discourses.     

Preference and reinforcer efficacy of high‐ and low‐tech items: A comparison of item type and duration of access

This study examined the interactions of stimulus type (high‐ vs. low‐tech) and magnitude (duration of access) on preference and reinforcer efficacy. Two preference assessments were conducted to identify highly preferred high‐tech and low‐tech items for each participant. A subsequent assessment examined preference for those items when provided at 30‐s and 600‐s durations. We then evaluated reinforcer efficacy for those same items when provided for a range of durations using progressive‐ratio schedules. Results suggested item type and access duration interacted to influence preference and reinforcer efficacy. Participants preferred high‐tech items at longer durations of access and engaged in more responding when the high‐tech item was provided for long durations, but these patterns were reversed for the low‐tech item. In addition, participants engaged in less responding when the high‐tech item was provided for short durations and when the low‐tech item was provided for long durations.     

Comparison of arousal and preference assessment outcomes for sex offenders with intellectual disabilities

We compared outcomes of arousal and preference assessments for five adult male alleged sexual offenders with intellectual disabilities. Arousal assessments involved the use of the penile plethysmograph to measure changes in penile circumference to both deviant (males and females under the age of 18) and nondeviant (males and females over the age of 18) video clips. Paired‐stimulus preference assessments were arranged to present still images from the video clips used in the arousal assessments. Results showed correspondence between the assessments for four out of the five participants. Implications are discussed for the use of preference assessment methodology as a less intrusive assessment approach for sexual offender assessments.