|
| Evaluating Preference for Instructional and Treatment Approaches in Individuals with Developmental Disabilities |
| Sunday, May 25, 2008 |
| 4:00 PM–5:20 PM |
| International South |
| Area: AUT/DDA; Domain: Applied Research |
| Chair: Richard B. Graff (The New England Center for Children) |
| CE Instructor: Richard B. Graff, M.S. |
| Abstract: This symposium presents research on evaluating preferences for instructional practices and treatment approaches in individuals with developmental disabilities. In the first study, preference for participant-selected versus experimenter-delivered reinforcers was evaluated, using a concurrent chains procedure. All three participants preferred thparticipant-selected condition; two of three preferred the participant-selected condition even when response requirements were three times that of thexperimenter-delivered condition. In the second study, preference assessme technology was used to identify variables maintaining problem behavior. Children with autism chose between three concurrently availabl consequences (attention, tangibles, escape), and the results were compared to those obtained in a multielement functional analysis. The concurrent assessment was able to identify a reinforcer that effectively suppressed problem behavior. In the third study, preference for and reinforcer efficacy of gluten- and casein-free foods (GFCF) were evaluated. Results suggested that GFCF foods were less preferred, and were less effective reinforcers than typical foods. The final study evaluated preference for two instructional approaches for children diagnosed with autism: ABA and TEACCH. Participants did not show a clear preference for one training procedure over the other, and data on time on task, problem behaviors, and positive affect did not show any clear differences between the procedures. |
| |
| Measuring Preference for Participant-Selected versus Experimenter-Delivered Reinforcers. |
| AUDREY HARHOOD (The New England Center for Children), Richard B. Graff (The New England Center for Children), William H. Ahearn (The New England Center for Children) |
| Abstract: The effects of choice of reinforcer were evaluated in three participants diagnosed with developmental disabilities, using a concurrent chains procedure. Responses to the initial link resulted in access to terminal links during which work on vocational tasks resulted in either the participant selecting one of three high-preference edible items (participant-selected condition), or the experimenter delivering an edible (experimenter-selected condition), with the schedule o reinforcer delivery yoked to the participants’ selections in the previous participant-selected condition. All three participants selected the link that allowed access to participant- selected reinforcers on 100% of opportunities. Then, the response requirements for the terminal link in the participant-selected condition were increase systematically, while the response requirements for the experimenter-delivered reinforcer remained constant. Two of three participants continued to select the participant-selected link even when the response requirement to access the reinforcer was three times that of the experimenter-delivered condition. Interobserver agreement data were collected during 33% of sessions, and was 100%. |
| |
| Using Children’s Choice to Identify Functional Reinforcers. |
| SHARI MARIE WINTERS (West Virginia University), Claire C St. Peter (West Virginia University) |
| Abstract: Functional analysis procedures can identify reinforcers maintaining problem behavior in individuals with developmental disabilities, but the amount of time or training required to conduct these analyses can be impractical. As an alternative to traditional preference assessments, it may be possible to identify functional reinforcers based on children’s preferences. This study used a concurrent schedule to identify preferences for reinforcers by allowing children with autism to choose between three simultaneously available consequences: attention, tangibles, and escape. The results of the concurrent assessment were compared to those obtained in a multielement functional analysis, and a treatment was developed using the reinforcers identified in the assessments. In general, the concurrent assessment was able to identify a reinforcer that effectively suppressed problem behavior during the treatment phase. |
| |
| Examining Preference for and Reinforcing Efficacy of Gluten- and Casein-Free Foods. |
| MAUREEN KELLY (The New England Center for Children), Dominique Maribett (The New England Center for Children), Richard B. Graff (The New England Center for Children) |
| Abstract: Although proponents of diet therapies suggest that eliminating gluten and casein may improve behavior in individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders (ASD), there is no empirical evidence to support this assertion. Two individuals with ASD participated in this study to evaluate preference for and reinforcing efficacy of gluten- and casein-free (GFCF) foods versus “typical” foods (i.e., similar foods that did contain gluten/casein). Five matched food dyads (e.g., brand name pretzels and GFCF pretzels) were used. To ensure familiarity with the edibles, paired-stimulus preference assessment trials were conducted. Then, a concurrent chains procedure was used, in which responses to the initial link resulted in access to terminal links during which work on math worksheets led to receiving access to GFCF edibles or the typical matched counterpart. For the first participant, across 5 GFCF/typical dyads, the mean percentage of responses to the initial link associated with typical foods was 76%, suggesting a preference for typical foods over GFCF foods. During the terminal links, the participant emitted a mean of 7.7 RPM for the typical foods, but only 5.2 RPM for the GFCF foods, suggesting that the GFCF foods were less effective reinforcers. Data for a second participant will also be presented. |
| |
| Use of Concurrent Chains Preference Assessment Procedure to Evaluate Children’s Preference for ABA versus TEACCH. |
| CARRIE M. BROWER-BREITWIESER (Idaho State University), Raymond G. Miltenberger (University of South Florida), Amy Gross (Western Michigan University), Justin Breitwieser (Idaho State University), Krystyna A. Orizondo-Korotko (Western Michigan University), R. Wayne Fuqua (Western Michigan University) |
| Abstract: The present study used a concurrent-chains operant preference assessment to evaluate preference for two instructional approaches commonly used with children diagnosed with autism: Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) and the Treatment and Education of Autistic and Communication Handicapped Children (Project TEACCH). It was hypothesized that the participants would demonstrate a preference for ABA. It was also hypothesized that the participants engaged in the ABA training program would engage in a higher percentage of on-task behavior, and would also engage in more behaviors related to positive affect, such as smiling and laughing. Overall the results showed that the participants did not show a clear preference for one training procedure over the other, although the percentage of ABA choices was slightly higher than the percentage of TEACCH choices (53.6% vs. 46.4%). Data on time on task, problem behaviors, and positive affect did not show any clear differences between the two procedures. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed. |
|
| |