Analysis of four measures of positional bias within a multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessment

Abstract

Positional bias is a pattern of responding to a specific location that can be influenced by response effort and/or prior learning history. Prior research on positional bias within stimulus preference assessments have focused primarily on its use in paired stimulus assessments due to the complex nature of the multiple stimulus without replacement (MSWO) preference assessment. The present study is a secondary data analysis that utilized four different methods to measure side and center bias in a MSWO preference assessment for 19 young children with autism spectrum disorder. Participants displayed varying degrees of biased responding but collectively engaged in minimal biased responding. This study includes an analysis of the four methodologies, discussion of general patterns of responding, and general recommendations for the application of these methodologies in future research.

An evaluation of preference stability within MSWO preference assessments for children with autism

“…Finally, it is unclear how stability and variability measures were affected by the physical location of each stimulus presented. Individuals with autism may engage in responding that is under the control of the position of the stimulus rather than preference for it during preference assessments; thus, they may select lesser preferred stimuli over more preferred stimuli as a result of the stimulus location in the array (Bourret et al, 2012; Miranda et al, 2023). It is unknown whether any of the participants engaged in responding characterized by a positional bias.…”

Retrospective consecutive controlled case series of outcomes for functional analyses of severe destructive behavior

“…In addition, although a handful of studies have documented the susceptibility of false‐positive tangible functional analysis outcomes (e.g., Rooker et al, 2011; Shirley et al, 1999), the overall prevalence of this phenomenon is not well documented. A plausible alternative is that tangible functions are becoming increasingly prevalent due to increased use of and preference for high‐tech items (e.g., Hoffmann et al, 2023). Future studies should consider reporting the tangible item present in tangible test conditions to determine whether there is any correspondence between the type of tangible item and the functional analysis outcome.…”

Evaluating convergent validity between RAISD and MSWO rankings across informants

“…MSWOs were completed in the same 3‐h window based on previous research on the preference stability of brief MSWOs corresponding to longer MSWOs (Conine et al., 2021). Stimuli were randomly arranged and presented simultaneously in each trial to account for side (location) and order biases (Miranda et al., 2023). Trials were repeated until no stimuli were left in the array, creating a hierarchy of stimulus preferences.…”