Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis logoLink to Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
. 2003 Spring;36(1):47–58. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2003.36-47

Response-restriction analysis: I. Assessment of activity preferences.

Gregory P Hanley 1, Brian A Iwata 1, Jana S Lindberg 1, Juliet Conners 1
PMCID: PMC1284416  PMID: 12723866

Abstract

We used procedures based on response-restriction (RR) analysis to assess vocational and leisure activity preferences for 3 adults with developmental disabilities. To increase the efficiency of the analysis relative to that reported in previous research, we used criteria that allowed activities to be restricted at the earliest point at which a preference could be determined. Results obtained across two consecutive RR assessments showed some variability in overall preference rankings but a high degree of consistency for highly ranked items. Finally, we compared results of the RR assessment with those of an extended free-operant assessment and found that the RR assessment yielded (a) more differentiated patterns of preference and (b) more complete information about engagement with all of the target activities.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (138.3 KB).

Selected References

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

  1. Bernstein D. J., Ebbesen E. B. Reinforcement and substitution in humans: a multiple-response analysis. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Nov;30(3):243–253. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.30-243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Carr J. E., Nicolson A. C., Higbee T. S. Evaluation of a brief multiple-stimulus preference assessment in a naturalistic context. J Appl Behav Anal. 2000 Fall;33(3):353–357. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2000.33-353. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Day R. M., Rea J. A., Schussler N. G., Larsen S. E., Johnson W. L. A functionally based approach to the treatment of self-injurious behavior. Behav Modif. 1988 Oct;12(4):565–589. doi: 10.1177/01454455880124005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. 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]
  5. 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]
  6. 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]
  7. Green G., Striefel S. Response restriction and substitution with autistic children. J Exp Anal Behav. 1988 Jul;50(1):21–32. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1988.50-21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hanley Gregory P., Iwata Brian A., Roscoe Eileen M., Thompson Rachel H., Lindberg Jana S. Response-restriction analysis: II. Alteration of activity preferences. J Appl Behav Anal. 2003 Spring;36(1):59–76. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2003.36-59. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Klatt K. P., Sherman J. A., Sheldon J. B. Effects of deprivation on engagement in preferred activities by persons with developmental disabilities. J Appl Behav Anal. 2000 Winter;33(4):495–506. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2000.33-495. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Lyons C. A., Cheney C. D. Time reallocation in a multiresponse environment: Effects of restricting response classes. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 May;41(3):279–289. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.41-279. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Mason S. A., McGee G. G., Farmer-Dougan V., Risley T. R. A practical strategy for ongoing reinforcer assessment. J Appl Behav Anal. 1989 Summer;22(2):171–179. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1989.22-171. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. McEntee J. E., Saunders R. R. A response-restriction analysis of stereotypy in adolescents with mental retardation: implications for applied behavior analysis. J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Fall;30(3):485–506. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-485. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. 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]
  14. Reid D. H., Everson J. M., Green C. W. A systematic evaluation of preferences identified through person-centered planning for people with profound multiple disabilities. J Appl Behav Anal. 1999 Winter;32(4):467–477. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1999.32-467. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. 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]
  16. Worsdell April S., Iwata Brian A., Wallace Michele D. Duration-based measures of preference for vocational tasks. J Appl Behav Anal. 2002 Fall;35(3):287–290. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2002.35-287. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Zhou L., Iwata B. A., Goff G. A., Shore B. A. Longitudinal analysis of leisure-item preferences. J Appl Behav Anal. 2001 Summer;34(2):179–184. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2001.34-179. [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