Two varying types of multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessments (MSWO) were conducted with three 21-year-old participants with low-functioning autism. The first preference assessment was parent-led. This was done by using a revised version of the RAISD, a parent interview tool, to gain the top ten items the parent viewed as being most reinforcing to their child. The experimenter then utilized those 10 items to conduct the multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessment. All three participants were also given a standard multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessment utilizing 10 generally common used reinforcing items that are typically available in a classroom setting. Upon yielding the results of each type of preference assessment, an alternate treatment design was utilized to determine reinforcing effects of the varying preference assessment results. A baseline phase occurred where participants completed a matching-to-sample file folder task, that they have all shown 100% competency with in the past, to record the duration and accuracy it took the participants to complete the activity while receiving no reinforcement. Duration and accuracy for the matching-to-sample file folder activity were then compared to determine if they would increase their speed and accuracy when presented the opportunity to gain the parent-led and standard preference assessment result’s reinforcer upon completion. Results showed students displayed shorter durations for both types of preferences, however slightly favored the teacher-led assessment. Accuracy was generally the same for baseline and both types of preference assessments.
|Advisor:||Baillie, Sara, Boerman-Cornell, William|
|School:||Trinity Christian College|
|School Location:||United States -- Illinois|
|Source:||MAI 57/06M(E), Masters Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Behavioral psychology, Special education|
|Keywords:||Autism, Preference assessment|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be