Choice and preference assessment research with people with severe to profound developmental disabilities: a review of the literature.

Since the last major empirical review on choice interventions and preference assessments among people with severe to profound developmental disabilities (Lancioni, O'Reilly, & Emerson, 1996) the body of research in this area has grown extensively. This paper reviews thirty studies carried out between 1996 and 2002 that have been sorted into four categories. These categories are (a) building choice opportunities into daily contexts; (b) assessing the effects of choice making on various parameters of behavior; (c) assessing preferences; and (d) assessing the effectiveness of various preference assessment formats. The main findings in these studies were that choice interventions led to decreases in inappropriate behavior and increases in appropriate behavior, and that various preference assessments could be used to identify reinforcing stimuli. The findings are discussed in relation to technical and practical rehabilitation questions. Potential issues for future research are also examined.

[1]  G E Lancioni,et al.  A review of choice research with people with severe and profound developmental disabilities. , 1996, Research in developmental disabilities.

[2]  B. Iwata,et al.  Emergence of reinforcer preference as a function of schedule requirements and stimulus similarity. , 1997, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[3]  L. Bambara,et al.  Effects of sampling opportunities on preference for adults with severe disabilities , 2001 .

[4]  M. Wehmeyer,et al.  Variability in the availability of choice to adults with mental retardation , 1995 .

[5]  D. Browder,et al.  Enhancing Choice and Participation for Adults with Severe Disabilities in Community-Based Instruction , 1998 .

[6]  B. Iwata,et al.  Effects of reinforcement choice on task responding in individuals with developmental disabilities. , 1997, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[7]  Glen Dunlap,et al.  The effects of choice-making on the problem behaviors of high school students with intellectual disabilities , 1996 .

[8]  D. Browder,et al.  Effects of Sampling Opportunities on Preference Development for Adults with Severe Disabilities , 2001 .

[9]  R. Horner,et al.  Identifying instructional tasks that occasion problem behaviors and assessing the effects of student versus teacher choice among these tasks. , 1997, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[10]  B. Iwata,et al.  Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences. , 1996, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[11]  E. Carr,et al.  Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. , 1985, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[12]  C. Kearney,et al.  Choice Availability and Persons with Mental Retardation: A Longitudinal and Regression Analysis , 1998 .

[13]  C. L. Cole,et al.  Effects of Within-Activity Choices on the Challenging Behavior of Children with Severe Developmental Disabilities , 2002 .

[14]  D. Reid,et al.  A systematic evaluation of preferences identified through person-centered planning for people with profound multiple disabilities. , 1999, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[15]  Brian A Iwata,et al.  Functional analysis of problem behavior: a review. , 2003, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[16]  R. Miltenberger,et al.  The Influence of Preference and Choice of Activity on Problem Behavior , 2001 .

[17]  G. Martin,et al.  Predicting the relative efficacy of three presentation methods for assessing preferences of persons with developmental disabilities. , 2002, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[18]  L. Heflin,et al.  Heller, Kathryn W.Preference Variability and the Instruction of Choice Making with Students with Severe Intellectual Disabilities. , 2002 .

[19]  Mobility versus sedentariness in task arrangements for people with multiple disabilities: an assessment of preferences. , 1998, Research in developmental disabilities.

[20]  B. Iwata,et al.  Displacement of leisure reinforcers by food during preference assessments. , 1997, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[21]  R. Stancliffe,et al.  Longitudinal study of deinstitutionalization and the exercise of choice. , 1997, Mental retardation.

[22]  L. Heflin,et al.  Preference variability and the instruction of choice making with students with severe intellectual disabilities. , 2002 .

[23]  S Lohrmann-O'Rourke,et al.  Empirically based methods to assess the preferences of individuals with severe disabilities. , 1998, American journal of mental retardation : AJMR.

[24]  Doug R. Moes,et al.  Integrating Choice-Making Opportunities within Teacher-Assigned Academic Tasks to Facilitate the Performance of Children with Autism , 1998 .

[25]  J Q Simmons,et al.  Manipulation of self-destruction in three retarded children. , 1969, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[26]  L. Kern,et al.  Choice of Task Sequence to Reduce Problem Behaviors , 2001 .

[27]  T. Vollmer,et al.  Evaluation of a brief stimulus preference assessment. , 1998, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[28]  J. McComas,et al.  Choice-making treatment of young children's severe behavior problems. , 1996, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[29]  C A Kearney,et al.  Preference, choice, and persons with disabilities: a synopsis of assessments, interventions, and future directions. , 1997, Clinical psychology review.

[30]  J. E. Carr,et al.  The effects of pictorial versus tangible stimuli in stimulus-preference assessments. , 1999, Research in developmental disabilities.

[31]  W. Fisher,et al.  Using a choice assessment to predict reinforcer effectiveness. , 1996, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[32]  R. B. Graff,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF REINFORCER CHOICE ON RATES OF CHALLENGING BEHAVIOR AND FREE OPERANT RESPONDING IN INDIVIDUALS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES , 1998 .

[33]  Linda M. Bambara,et al.  Opportunities for Daily Choice Making , 1996 .

[34]  W. Fisher,et al.  Integrating caregiver report with systematic choice assessment to enhance reinforcer identification. , 1996, American journal of mental retardation : AJMR.

[35]  C. Carter,et al.  Using Choice with Game Play to Increase Language Skills and Interactive Behaviors in Children with Autism , 2001 .

[36]  R. D. Horner.  The effects of an environmental "enrichment" program on the behavior of institutionalized profoundly retarded children. , 1980, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[37]  Levan Lim,et al.  Providing Choice Making Opportunities Within and Between Daily School Routines , 1999 .

[38]  Analysis of activity preferences as a function of differential consequences. , 1999, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[39]  M. O'Reilly,et al.  Engagement in Cooperative and Individual Tasks: Assessing the Performance and Preferences of Persons with Multiple Disabilities , 2002 .

[40]  S. Lohrmann-O'Rourke,et al.  Naturalistic Assessment of and Intervention for Mouthing Behaviors Influenced by Establishing Operations , 2001 .

[41]  C. Hughes,et al.  Assessing Preferences and Choices of Persons with Severe and Profound Mental Retardation. , 1998 .

[42]  Teaching Staff Members to Provide Choice Opportunities for Adults with Multiple Disabilities , 2000 .

[43]  D. Browder,et al.  Preparing staff to enhance active participation of adults with severe disabilities by offering choice and prompting performance during a community purchasing activity. , 2001, Research in developmental disabilities.