Comparison of the predictive validity and consistency among preference assessment procedures: A review of the literature

An Evaluation of a Brief Multiple-Stimulus Without Replacement Preference Assessment Conducted in an Electronic Pictorial Format

“…The cumulative number of responses that resulted in access to HP toys was higher than responses that resulted in access to LP toys for Martin, Tyler, and Landon. These results are consistent with previous research on brief MSWOs (e.g., Carr et al 2000;Paramore and Higbee 2005) and the body of preference assessment research that suggests that HP items are more likely to function as reinforcers than LP items (see Kang et al 2013). Finally, Tyler's results are consistent with previous findings that LP items may also function as reinforcers in some cases (e.g., Roscoe et al 1999;Taravella et al 2000).…”

“…DeLeon and Iwata reported that the MSWO may accurately identify reinforcers and that it may also take less time to conduct than other forms of preference assessments, such as the paired stimulus preference assessment developed by Fisher et al (1992). A review conducted by Kang et al (2013) confirmed that items selected first in MSWOs have a higher probability of functioning as reinforcers than items selected last and that MSWOs generally take less time to administer than other forms of preference assessments. The brief MSWO (Carr et al 2000;Paramore and Higbee 2005), an extension of the MSWO, has further reduced the response effort associated with conducting a preference assessment.…”

“…One criticism of the MSWO format, however, is that it involves the presentation of multiple tangible items at one time (Kang et al 2013). This drawback may make administration difficult if the instructor is assessing preference for large or immobile items (e.g., sandbox, slide, pre-built K'nex construction set).…”

An Evaluation of a Brief Video-Based Multiple-Stimulus Without Replacement Preference Assessment

“…Then, the remaining items are re-arranged and the student is given another opportunity to make a selection. This process continues until the student selects all items.A recent review of preference assessment research by Kang et al (2013) suggests that highly preferred (HP) items identified in MSWOs are likely to function as reinforcers. Aside from the predictive validity of MSWOs in identifying reinforcers, MSWOs may take less time to complete than other types of preference assessments, such as paired-stimulus (Fisher et al 1992) preference assessments.…”

“…Whereas a paired-stimulus preference assessment involves the simultaneous presentation of two items at once, a brief MSWO involves, at least initially, the presentation of more than two items. Depending on the overall size of the array and the form (e.g., large toys or activities) of stimuli, administration may be difficult or impractical (Kang et al 2013). To mitigate this issue, practitioners Implications for Practitioners 1.…”