Unit 7 ASR's Flashcards
Behavioral assessment is conducted:
A.before, (pre) and after, (post), treatment
B. mostly only prior to treatment
C On an ongoing basis
C
A non-behavioral clinician would ask do you hear voices? What do they tell you? Instead, we would assess:
A. Auditory hallucinations.
B. Client mental status.
C. Neurological indicators of schizophrenia,
D. talking to self without apparent stimulus
D
A non-behavioral clinician would say that talking to self without apparent stimulus is just a _____Of schizophrenia
A. Behavior
B correlate
C hypothetical construct
D. symptom
D symptom
The results of the paired stimulus preference assessment indicate that:
There was greater differentiation in approach as compared to the single stimulus
How did Fisher define the high SS item?
Iapproached greater than 80% of trials on SS but Less than 60% in the PS
What is the limitation of Fisher?
We don’t know if the high single stimulus item is a reinforcer
Found that MSW methods are more efficient than PS method
Paired stimulus method resulted in more distinct rankings, 16.7% of items never selected in multi stimulus method
Purpose: compare multiple stimulus assessments with and without replacement of selected items
Windsor, Multiple Stimulus with Replacement MSW
Designed it procedure is to combine best features of PMS and MSW to create a new assessment called the multiple stimulus without replacement, MSWO
Deleon and Iwata
Results: high degree of consistency for highest ranked stimulus across all three assessments
MSW method produced more unselected stimuli then MSWO or PS methods
Rankings across assessments were similar and fairly consistent.
MSW and MSWO were more efficient than Paired stimulus
Deleon, Iwata study 1 MSW versus MSWO
Results: 43/4 participants, reinforcement effect. That is items that were never selected during the MSW (But were selected during the MSW and PS), increased behaviors when delivered contingently
Conclusions: MSWO identifies more reinforcers then MSW.
MSW produces more false negative outcomes, I E, MSW fails to identify stimuli that could function as reinforcers
Deleon Iwata Study 2: reinforcer assessment. Comparing MSW, MSWO and PS
Roane et al. Study 1: preference assessment
Reinforcer assessment A: access to preferred item. No item
Reinforcer assessment B: get preferred item. Get non-preferred item
Results:
reinforcer assessment A: 5 of 6 spent more time in preferred item Square. One never into either Square.
Reinforcer assessment B: 3 of 4 spent more time working for preferred item. One switch back-and-forth
Roane et al Study 1 preference assessment
Free operand procedure results
Preferred stimulus identified for all subjects
Roane Study 2:
Paired stimulus versus Free Operant
Results:
Eight of 17 subjects highest item was the same in both Paired stimulus and free operant
13 subjects engaged in some amount of problem behavior
11 of the 13 engaged in more problem behavior in the paired stimulus assessment
Average length of parrot stimulus was 22 minutes versus 5 minutes for free operant
Roscoe, Absolute and relative reinforcement Effects
Purpose: to compare SS and PS preference procedure is under single and can current schedules
Concurrent procedure may mask reinforcing affects of a less preferred stimulus:
The LP stimulus might be a reinforcer if it’s the only stimulus you can earn. But if you can get a higher preferred stimulus you will work for that then the less preferred
Results: SS: all subjects showed uniformly High I approach, Jim exception.
PS: grader differentiation in approach.
For each subject, they identified two stimuli :
High preference approached most frequently in both single stimulus and paired stimulus
Low preference stimulus ranked high in SS, low in PS… had most discrepancy in rankings
Roscoe :
Study 1 preference assessment
Roscoe Results:
concurrent reinforcement. For 7!of 8 subjects responding for HP greater than responding for LP
Single reinforcement: four6 of 7 subjects, responding for LP was greater than responding in baseline
Study 2: reinforcer assessment results
Roscoe
Conclusions: concurrent schedule masked reinforcement affects of LP stimuli. LP ranks high in single stimulus but low in paired stimulus
Single stimulus method better suited for identifying many reinforcers
Paired stimulus method better suited for identifying most potent reinforcers
Study 2: reinforcer assessment
Purpose: to evaluate preferences in a brief, free operant format
Five minutes allows for frequent assessment. Free operant assessments allow You to assess preferences without having to remove the stimuli
Roane, et al : Free Operant assessment
Deleon et al
Purpose: to clarify unclear selection based preference assessment results
MSWO can produce undifferentiated outcomes, especially in cases when all items are highly preferred or when none of the items are preferred.
Can result in differentiated outcomes
Duration based assessment
Results: MSW: all subjects had only one item that was approached greater than 50% of trials
Duration based: four subjects, seven stimuli equals 28 cases. 23/28 cases equals greater than 50% of session with item interaction
Reinforcer assessment: nine preferred from MSWO but preferred from duration increased responding for both subjects. Non-preferred in both assessments one subject only: no reinforcement affect
Deleon duration based assessment
Conclusions: many items in the middle of the pack in MSWO produce high levels of engagement in duration procedure
Based on reinforcer assessment results, this parent was likely because the items were all highly preferred
DeLeone Duration- Based Assessment
Duration based assessment designed to determine the extent to which stimuli displaced problem behavior. Sometimes problematic behaviors occur because they produce automatic reinforcers i.e. sensory stimulation.
We can’t control those sensory be in for service so we try to find things that compete with them
.One of the most common reasons for conducting this assessment
Competing Stimulus assessment
Identical to the direction based assessment by DeLeone
Each assessment equals five minutes of access to a single stimulus
Dependent variables. :engagement duration or percentage of intervals
Problem behavior, rate, duration or percentage of intervals
Example, Healthy eating items for people with pico
Competing stimulus assessment
Assesses reinforcer affectedness as the response requirement increases.
Provides information about the potency of a reinforcer
Tells you the maximum amount of work you can require for a given reinforcer maybe data are still out on this one
Progressive ratio schedules
