The Effects Of Establishing Operations On Preferences For Tangible Items

Lindens Neurobehavioral Stabilization Program.
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (Impact Factor: 1.19). 02/2005; 38(1):107-10. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2005.112-03
Source: PubMed


Researchers have demonstrated that both deprivation and satiation can affect the outcome of preference assessments for food. In the current study, paired-stimulus preference assessments for tangible items were conducted under three conditions: control, deprivation, and satiation. Three persons with developmental disabilities and 3 typically developing preschool children served as participants. The results demonstrated that deprivation and satiation influenced the outcome of preference assessments of leisure items or toys.

Download full-text


Available from: Mikhail N Koffarnus, Apr 08, 2014
  • Source
    • "During satiation, the reinforcing effectiveness of the stimulus momentarily decreases as does the frequency of behaviors that have produced that stimulus as a consequence. Satiation and deprivation can influence preference rank (e.g., Gottschalk et al. 2000; McAdam et al. 2005) and impact the effectiveness of common reinforcers. For example, Vollmer and Iwata (1991) examined rates of simple responses under conditions of deprivation and satiation for food, activities, and attention. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Reinforcement is a process by which a consequence, a reinforcer, follows a response and increases the future likelihood of that response under similar conditions. Parents, teachers, clinicians, and other caregivers use reinforcement-based procedures in educational and therapeutic arrangements for individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) to increase desirable behavior and to reduce the frequency of undesirable behavior. The precision and ultimate success of these procedures depends on selecting the right reinforcers and arranging their delivery in an effective fashion. Thus, understanding how to identify and arrange reinforcers, as well as the variables that influence the effectiveness of reinforcers, are critical to designing and implementing effective reinforcement-based interventions.
    Full-text · Chapter · Jan 2014
  • Source
    • "Catter, & Neidert, 2000; DeLeon, Iwata, Goh, & Worsdell, 1997; Gottschalk, Libby, & Graff, 2000; McAdam et. al, 2005)."

    Preview · Article · Jan 2011
  • Source
    • "These findings are significant in that they objectively demonstrated that extra precautions should be taken into account for variables that may alter the effectiveness of stimuli when evaluating potential reinforcers. A partial replication of the Gottschalk et al. study demonstrated that similar effects were achieved when preference for tangible items was assessed (McAdam et al., 2005). When conducting a preference assessment, it is important that accurate results are obtained to enhance the identification of potent reinforcers. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The abative effects of a 10-min period of free access to a participant's most preferred edible on preference assessment outcomes was examined using a multielement design with three individuals diagnosed with autism. Four moderately preferred edible items were identified for each participant; access to these edibles was then regulated throughout the study, to control for the number of edibles consumed. Four-item paired stimulus preference assessments were then conducted, under four treatment conditions. A control condition, which involved conducting four-item paired stimulus assessments, was used to determine baseline levels of preference for each edible. Preference assessments conducted under the other three treatment conditions were preceded by a 10-min period of free access to the participant's most preferred edible. The immediate condition involved conducting preference assessments immediately following the 10-min free-access period. The 10-min delay condition and the 20-min delay condition involved conducting preference assessments following a 10-min or 20-min delay after the free access period. For two participants, 10-min of free access to a preferred edible immediately prior to a preference assessment altered the probability of selecting that stimulus, but as the delay between the free-access period and the preference assessment increased, the abative effects became less apparent. For the third participant, preference did not change when assessments were immediately conducted following the 10-min period of free access. Implications of the study are discussed.
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2009 · Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders
Show more