Advertisement

Training Change Agents how to Implement Formal Preference Assessments: a Review of the Literature

  • Justin B. LeafEmail author
  • Christine Milne
  • Wafa A. Aljohani
  • Julia L. Ferguson
  • Joseph H. Cihon
  • Misty L. Oppenheim-Leaf
  • John McEachin
  • Ronald Leaf
REVIEW ARTICLE
  • 12 Downloads

Abstract

Formal preference assessments are commonly implemented as a way to evaluate potential reinforcers for individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, developmental disabilities, and intellectual disabilities. Today there are numerous formal preference assessments that can be used clinically, and which have been evaluated empirically. Therefore, formal preference assessments are a procedure that behavior analysts, professionals (e.g., teachers or paraprofessionals), and students are trained to implement accurately. This review of the literature included 19 articles, with 21 experiments, that evaluated different way to train change agents to implement a formal preference assessment. We evaluated each of the experiments along multiple dimensions (e.g., participant demographics, training procedures, and percentage of non-overlapping data). From this analysis we provided information on the current status of research on training change agents on how to implement formal preference assessments, reveal limitations in the current literature base, and provide suggestion for future clinicians, researchers, and certifying bodies.

Keywords

Behavior analysts Preference assessments Multiple stimulus Paired-stimulus preference assessment Staff training And training 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interests

None of the authors have any conflict of interests with the information presented within this article.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

As such no informed consent was needed in this study.

References

  1. Alcalay, A., Fersugon, J. L., Cihon, J. H., Torress, N., Leaf, J. B., Leaf, R., Mceachin, J., Schulze, K. A., & Rudrud, E. H. (In Press). Comparing multiple stimulus preference assessments without replacement to in-the-moment reinforcer analysis on rate of responding. Education and Training Autism and Developmental Disorders. Google Scholar
  2. Behavior Analyst Certification Board. (2013). Registered behavior technician™ (RBT®) task list. Retrieved from https://www.bacb.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/161019-RBT-task-list-english.pdf
  3. Bishop, M. R., & Kenzer, A. L. (2012). Teaching behavioral therapies to conduct brief preference assessments during therapy sessions. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 6, 450–457.Google Scholar
  4. Bovi, G. M. D., Vladescu, J. C., DeBar, R. M., Carroll, R. A., & Sarokoff, R. A. (2017). Using video modeling with voice-over instruction to train public school staff to implement a preference assessment. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10(1), 72–76.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-016-0135-y.Google Scholar
  5. Brock, M. E., & Carter, E. W. (2016). A meta-analysis of practitioner training to improve implementation of interventions for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education. Advance online publication, 38, 131–144.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516653477.Google Scholar
  6. Brock, M. E., Cannella-Malone, H. I., Seaman, R. L., Andzik, N. R., Schaefer, J. M., Page, E. J., Barczak, M. A., & Dueker, S. A. (2017). Findings across practitioner training studies in special education: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 84, 7–26.Google Scholar
  7. Ciccone, F. J., Graff, R. B., & Ahearn, W. H. (2015). Increasing the efficiency of paired-stimulus preference assessments by identifying categories of preference. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48(1), 221–226.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.190.Google Scholar
  8. DeLeon, I. G., & Iwata, B. A. (1996). Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29(4), 519–532.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1996.29-519.Google Scholar
  9. Deliperi, P., Vladescu, J. C., Reeve, K. F., Reeve, S. A., & DeBar, R. M. (2015). Training staff to implement a paired-stimulus preference assessment using video modeling with voiceover instruction. Behavioral Interventions, 30, 314–332.Google Scholar
  10. Delli Bovi, G. M., Vladescu, J. C., DeBar, R. M., Carroll, R. A., & Sarokoff, R. A. (2017). Using video modeling with voice-over instruction to train public school staff to implement a preference assessment. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10, 72–76.Google Scholar
  11. Fisher, W., Piazza, C. C., Bowman, L. G., Hagopian, L. P., Owens, J. C., & Slevin, I. (1992). A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(2), 491–498.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1992.25-491.Google Scholar
  12. Fisher, W. W., Piazza, C. C., Bowman, L. G., & Amari, A. (1996). Integrating caregiver report with a systematic choice assessment to enhance reinforcer identification. American Journal on Mental Retardation.Google Scholar
  13. Graff, R. B., & Karsten, A. M. (2012). Assessing preferences of individuals with developmental disabilities: A survey of current practices. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 5(2), 37–48.Google Scholar
  14. Graff, R. B., & Karsten, A. M. (2012b). Evaluation of self-instruction package for conducting stimulus preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45, 69–82.Google Scholar
  15. Grow, L., & LeBlanc, L. (2013). Teaching receptive language skills: Recommendations for instructors. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 6(1), 56–75.Google Scholar
  16. Higgins, W. J., Luczynski, K. C., Carroll, R. A., Fisher, W. W., & Mudford, O. C. (2017). Evaluation of a telehealth training package to remotely train staff to conduct preference assessment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 50, 238–251.Google Scholar
  17. Kang, S., O’Reilly, M., Lancioni, G., Falcomata, T. S., Sigafoos, J., & Xu, Z. (2013). Comparison of the predictive validity and consistency among preference assessment procedures: A review of the literature. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34(4), 1125–1133.Google Scholar
  18. Karsten, A. M., Carr, J. E., & Lepper, T. L. (2011). Description of a practitioner model for identifying preferred stimuli with individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Behavior Modification, 35(4), 347–369.Google Scholar
  19. Lavie, T., & Sturmey, P. (2002). Training staff to conduct a paired-stimulus preference assessment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 209–211.Google Scholar
  20. Leaf, J. B., Leaf, R., Alacalay, A., Leaf, J. A., Ravid, D., Dale, S., et al. (2015). Utility of formal preference assessments for individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 50(2), 199–212.Google Scholar
  21. Leaf, J. B., Leaf, R., Leaf, J. A., Alcalay, A., Ravid, D., Dale, S., et al. (2016). Comparing paired-stimulus preference assessments with in-the-moment reinforcer analysis on skill acquisition: A preliminary investigation. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 33, 1–11.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357616645329.Google Scholar
  22. Lerman, D. C., Vorndran, C. M., Addison, L., & Kuhn, S. C. (2004). Preparing teachers in evidence-based practices for young children with autism. School Psychology Review, 33(4), 510–526.Google Scholar
  23. Lipschultz, J. L., Vladescu, J. C., Reeve, K. F., Reeve, S. A., & Dipsey, C. R. (2015). Using video modeling with voiceover instruction to train staff to conduct stimulus preference assessments. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 27, 505–532.Google Scholar
  24. Maffei-Almodovar, L., & Sturmey, P. (2018). Change agent training in behavior analytic procedures for people with developmental and intellectual disabilities: A meta-analysis. Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. Advance online publication, 5, 129–141.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40489-018-0128-6.Google Scholar
  25. Miljkovic, M., Kaminski, L., Yu, C. T., & Wishnowski, L. (2015). Evaluation of video modelling and self-instructional manual to teach students to conduct a preference assessment. Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 21, 3–10.Google Scholar
  26. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Reprint—Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Physical Therapy, 89(9), 873–880.  https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/89.9.873.Google Scholar
  27. Nottingham, C. L., Vladescu, J. C., Giannakakos, A. R., Schnell, L. K., & Lipschultz, J. L. (2017). Using video modeling with voiceover instruction plus feedback to train implementation of stimulus preference assessments. Learning and Motivation, 58, 37–47.Google Scholar
  28. Pace, G. M., Ivancic, M. T., Edwards, G. L., Iwata, B. A., & Page, T. J. (1985). Assessment of stimulus preference and reinforcer value with profoundly retarded individuals. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18(3), 249–255.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1985.18-249.Google Scholar
  29. Pence, S. T., St Peter, C. C., & Tetreault, A. S. (2012). Increasing accurate preference assessment implementation through pyramidal training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45(2), 345–359.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-345.Google Scholar
  30. Ramon, D., Yu, C. T., Martin, G. L., & Martin, T. (2015). Evaluation of a self-instructional manual to teach multiple-stimulus without replacement preference assessments. Journal of Behavioral Education, 24(3), 289–303.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-015-9222-3.Google Scholar
  31. Roane, H. S., Vollmer, T. R., Ringdahl, J. E., & Marcus, B. A. (1998). Evaluation of a brief stimulus preference assessment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31(4), 605–620.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1998.31-605.Google Scholar
  32. Robert H. Horner, Edward G. Carr, James Halle, Gail McGee, Samuel Odom, Mark Wolery, (2016). The Use of Single-Subject Research to Identify Evidence-Based Practice in Special Education. Exceptional Children 71 (2):165-179.Google Scholar
  33. Rosales, R., Gongola, L., & Homlitas, C. (2015). An evaluation of video modeling with embedded instructions to teach implementation of stimulus preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48(1), 209–214.Google Scholar
  34. Roscoe, E. M., & Fisher, W. W. (2008). Evaluation of an efficient method for training staff to implement stimulus preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 41, 249–254.Google Scholar
  35. Roscoe, E. M., Fisher, W. W., Glover, A. C., & Volkert, V. M. (2006). Evaluating the relative effects of feedback and contingent money for staff training of stimulus preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39, 63–77.Google Scholar
  36. Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2001). How to summarize single-participant research: Ideas and applications. Exceptionality, 9(4), 227–244.  https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327035EX0904_5.Google Scholar
  37. Shapiro, M., Kazemi, E., Pogosjana, M., Rios, D., & Mendoza, M. (2016). Preference assessment training via self-instruction: A replication and extension. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49(4), 794–808.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.339.Google Scholar
  38. Smith, T. (2012). Evolution of research on interventions for individuals with autism spectrum disorder: Implications for behavior analysts. The Behavior Analyst Today, 35(1), 101–113.Google Scholar
  39. Smith, T., Scahill, L., Dawson, G., Guthrie, D., Lord, C., Odom, S., Rogers, S., & Wagner, A. (2007). Designing research studies on psychosocial interventions in autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37(2), 354–366.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-006-0173.Google Scholar
  40. Virués-Ortega, J., Pritchard, K., Grant, R. L., North, S., Hurtado-Parrado, C., Lee, M. S., et al. (2014). Clinical decision making and preference assessment for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 119(2), 151–170.Google Scholar
  41. Weldy, C. R., Rapp, J. T., & Capocasa, K. (2014). Training staff to implement brief stimulus preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 47, 214–218.Google Scholar
  42. Wishnowski, L. A., Yu, C.T., Pear, J., Chand, C., & Saltel, L. (2017). Effects of computer-aided instruction on the implementation of the MSWO stimulus preference assessment. Behavioral Interventions (Published Online).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Justin B. Leaf
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Christine Milne
    • 1
    • 2
  • Wafa A. Aljohani
    • 1
    • 2
  • Julia L. Ferguson
    • 1
  • Joseph H. Cihon
    • 1
    • 2
  • Misty L. Oppenheim-Leaf
    • 3
  • John McEachin
    • 1
  • Ronald Leaf
    • 1
  1. 1.Autism Partnership FoundationSeal BeachUSA
  2. 2.Endicott CollegeBeverlyUSA
  3. 3.Behavior Therapy and Learning CenterSeal BeachUSA

Personalised recommendations