Skip to main content
Log in

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

  • REVIEW ARTICLE
  • Published:
Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • 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.

  • 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

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grow, L., & LeBlanc, L. (2013). Teaching receptive language skills: Recommendations for instructors. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 6(1), 56–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavie, T., & Sturmey, P. (2002). Training staff to conduct a paired-stimulus preference assessment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 209–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Justin B. Leaf.

Ethics declarations

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.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Leaf, J.B., Milne, C., Aljohani, W.A. et al. Training Change Agents how to Implement Formal Preference Assessments: a Review of the Literature. J Dev Phys Disabil 32, 41–56 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-019-09668-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-019-09668-2

Keywords

Navigation