title: Predicting Optimal Preference Assessment Methods for Individuals with Developmental Disabilities.
abstract: The single-stimulus (SS) preference assessment procedure has been described as more appropriate than the paired stimulus (PS) procedure for "lower functioning" individuals, but this guideline's vagueness limits its usefulness. We administered the SS and PS preference assessment procedures with food items to seven individuals with severe or profound developmental disabilities who scored at level 2 of the Assessment of Basic Learning Abilities (ABLA) and seven who scored at ABLA level 3. Thirteen of the 14 participants also received these assessments (PS and SS), with non-food items. The two procedures were about equally effective for both groups, and with both types of stimuli, although the PS procedure produced more refined preference hierarchies. Most participants showed moderate to high correlations in preference scores between the two procedures for both food and non-food items. These results suggest that, for individuals who score at either ABLA level 2 or ABLA level 3, the SS and the PS procedures are equally likely to identify preferred stimuli.
authors.affiliation: University of Manitoba and the St. Amant Research Center.
authors.forename: Kendra M
authors.initials: KM
authors.lastname: Thomson
authors.forename: Diana
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Czarnecki
authors.forename: Toby L
authors.initials: TL
authors.lastname: Martin
authors.forename: C T
authors.initials: CT
authors.lastname: Yu
authors.forename: Garry L
authors.initials: GL
authors.lastname: Martin
references.citation: Behav Modif. 2004 Sep;28(5):668-77
references.pmid: 15296524
references.citation: J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Spring;29(1):1-9
references.pmid: 8881340
references.citation: J Appl Behav Anal. 1985 Fall;18(3):249-55
references.pmid: 4044458
references.citation: J Appl Behav Anal. 1991 Fall;24(3):537-52
references.pmid: 1836459
references.citation: Am J Ment Retard. 2002 Sep;107(5):329-39
references.pmid: 12186574
references.citation: Res Dev Disabil. 1996 Jan-Feb;17(1):77-92
references.pmid: 8750077
references.citation: J Appl Behav Anal. 2002 Spring;35(1):49-58
references.pmid: 11936545
references.citation: J Appl Behav Anal. 1992 Summer;25(2):491-8
references.pmid: 1634435
references.citation: J Appl Behav Anal. 1988 Spring;21(1):31-43
references.pmid: 2967274
references.citation: J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Spring;29(1):67-78
references.pmid: 8881345