Skip to main content
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis logoLink to Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
. 2001 Winter;34(4):475–485. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2001.34-475

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

L P Hagopian 1, K S Rush 1, A B Lewin 1, E S Long 1
PMCID: PMC1284341  PMID: 11800186

Abstract

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.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (194.3 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. DeLeon I. G., Iwata B. A., Conners J., Wallace M. D. Examination of ambiguous stimulus preferences with duration-based measures. J Appl Behav Anal. 1999 Spring;32(1):111–114. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1999.32-111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. DeLeon I. G., Iwata B. A. Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences. J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Winter;29(4):519–533. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1996.29-519. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. DeLeon I. G., Iwata B. A., Roscoe E. M. Displacement of leisure reinforcers by food during preference assessments. J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Fall;30(3):475–484. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-475. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Fisher W. W., Piazza C. C., Bowman L. G., Amari A. Integrating caregiver report with systematic choice assessment to enhance reinforcer identification. Am J Ment Retard. 1996 Jul;101(1):15–25. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Fisher W., Piazza C. C., Bowman L. G., Hagopian L. P., Owens J. C., Slevin I. A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities. J Appl Behav Anal. 1992 Summer;25(2):491–498. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1992.25-491. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-203. [DOI] [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]
  7. Pace G. M., Ivancic M. T., Edwards G. L., Iwata B. A., Page T. J. Assessment of stimulus preference and reinforcer value with profoundly retarded individuals. J Appl Behav Anal. 1985 Fall;18(3):249–255. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1985.18-249. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Piazza C. C., Fisher W. W., Hagopian L. P., Bowman L. G., Toole L. Using a choice assessment to predict reinforcer effectiveness. J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Spring;29(1):1–9. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1996.29-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Roane H. S., Vollmer T. R., Ringdahl J. E., Marcus B. A. Evaluation of a brief stimulus preference assessment. J Appl Behav Anal. 1998 Winter;31(4):605–620. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1998.31-605. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis are provided here courtesy of Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

RESOURCES