Some determinants of changes in preference over time

被引:61
作者
Hanley, GP
Iwata, BA
Roscoe, EM
机构
[1] Univ Kansas, Appl Behav Sci Dept, Lawrence, KS 66045 USA
[2] Univ Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611 USA
关键词
conditioning; developmental disabilities; imposed variability; longitudinal assessment; preference assessment; preference stability; satiation;
D O I
10.1901/jaba.2006.163-04
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
Results of longitudinal studies suggest that the stability of preferences varies across individuals, although it is unclear what variables account for these differences. We extended this work by conducting periodic assessments of preference for leisure activities over 3 to 6 months with 10 adults with developmental disabilities. Although previous research has collectively shown that preferences identified via repeated assessment are highly variable, our results showed that preferences were relatively stable for the majority (80%) of participants. In an attempt to identify some environmental determinants of shifts in preference, we provided extended daily access to high-preference items (preference-weakening manipulation) and paired access to low-preference items with social and edible putative reinforcers during brief sessions (preference-strengthening manipulation). Preference assessments continued over the course of these manipulations with 2 participants. Results showed that changes in preference across time could be produced systematically and suggest that naturally occurring changes in establishing operations or conditioning histories contribute to temporal shifts in preference. Implications for preference assessments, reinforcer usage, and planned attempts to change preferences are discussed.
引用
收藏
页码:189 / 202
页数:14
相关论文
共 24 条
[1]   Evaluation of a brief multiple-stimulus preference assessment in a naturalistic context [J].
Carr, JE ;
Nicolson, AC ;
Higbee, TS .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS, 2000, 33 (03) :353-357
[2]  
CICCHETTI DV, 1981, AM J MENT DEF, V86, P127
[3]   Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences [J].
DeLeon, IG ;
Iwata, BA .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS, 1996, 29 (04) :519-533
[5]   A COMPARISON OF 2 APPROACHES FOR IDENTIFYING REINFORCERS FOR PERSONS WITH SEVERE AND PROFOUND DISABILITIES [J].
FISHER, W ;
PIAZZA, CC ;
BOWMAN, LG ;
HAGOPIAN, LP ;
OWENS, JC ;
SLEVIN, I .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS, 1992, 25 (02) :491-498
[6]   On the relative reinforcing effects of choice and differential consequences [J].
Fisher, WW ;
Thompson, RH ;
Piazza, CC ;
Crosland, K ;
Gotjen, D .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS, 1997, 30 (03) :423-438
[7]  
Fisher WW, 1996, AM J MENT RETARD, V101, P15
[8]   The effects of establishing operations on preference assessment outcomes [J].
Gottschalk, JM ;
Libby, ME ;
Graff, RB .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS, 2000, 33 (01) :85-88
[9]   Embedded evaluation of preferences sampled from person-centered plans for people with profound multiple disabilities [J].
Green, CW ;
Middleton, SG ;
Reid, DH .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS, 2000, 33 (04) :639-642
[10]   Response-restriction analysis: II. Alteration of activity preferences [J].
Hanley, GP ;
Iwata, BA ;
Roscoe, EM ;
Thompson, RH ;
Lindberg, JS .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS, 2003, 36 (01) :59-76