评估适用于普通教育人群的偏好评估。
Evaluating preference assessments for use in the general education population.
作者信息
Resetar Jennifer L, Noell George H
机构信息
Louisiana State University, USA.
出版信息
J Appl Behav Anal. 2008 Fall;41(3):447-51. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2008.41-447.
Abstract
This study compared the effectiveness of a multiple-stimulus-without-replacement (MSWO) preference assessment and teacher preference ranking in identifying reinforcers for use in a general education setting with typically developing elementary-school children. The mean number of digits correctly answered was greater in the MSWO-selected reward and the teacher-selected reward conditions relative to the no-reward condition for 2 of the 4 participants, but there were no differences between the MSWO-selected and teacher-selected reward conditions for any participant.
摘要
本研究比较了无替换多刺激（MSWO）偏好评估和教师偏好排序在为典型发育的小学儿童确定用于普通教育环境中的强化物方面的有效性。在4名参与者中的2名中，相对于无奖励条件，MSWO选择的奖励和教师选择的奖励条件下正确回答的数字平均数更高，但对于任何参与者，MSWO选择的奖励条件和教师选择的奖励条件之间均无差异。
相似文献
1
Evaluating preference assessments for use in the general education population.评估适用于普通教育人群的偏好评估。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2008 Fall;41(3):447-51. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2008.41-447.
2
Evaluation of the multiple-stimulus without replacement preference assessment method using activities as stimuli.使用活动作为刺激物评估无替换多选偏好评估方法。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2009 Fall;42(3):563-74. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2009.42-563.
3
Core subjects at the end of primary school: identifying and explaining relative strengths of children with specific language impairment (SLI).小学阶段末期的核心课程：识别并解释特定语言障碍（SLI）儿童的相对优势。
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2015 Mar-Apr;50(2):226-40. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12137. Epub 2014 Dec 3.
4
[Selective failure in mathematics in elementary education].[小学教育中数学方面的选择性学习障碍]
Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord). 1980 Mar-Apr;101(3-4):107-31.
5
Using Pictures Depicting App Icons to Conduct an MSWO Preference Assessment on a Tablet Device.使用描绘应用程序图标的图片在平板电脑设备上进行改良单一刺激偏好评估。
Behav Anal Pract. 2018 Oct 30;12(2):335-342. doi: 10.1007/s40617-018-00309-2. eCollection 2019 Jun.
6
Achievement correlates of the Woodcock-Johnson Reading and Mathematics Subtests, KeyMath, and Woodcock Reading in an elementary aged learning disabled population.伍德考克-约翰逊阅读和数学分测验、关键数学测试以及伍德考克阅读测试在小学阶段学习障碍人群中的成绩相关性。
J Learn Disabil. 1984 May;17(5):258-61. doi: 10.1177/002221948401700501.
7
Further refinement of video-based brief multiple-stimulus without replacement preference assessments.基于视频的简短无替换多重刺激偏好评估的进一步优化。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2017 Jan;50(1):170-175. doi: 10.1002/jaba.358. Epub 2016 Oct 21.
8
Predictive validity of curriculum-based measurement and teacher ratings of academic achievement.课程本位测验与教师学业成绩评定的预测效度。
J Sch Psychol. 2013 Aug;51(4):499-515. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2013.02.004. Epub 2013 Mar 26.
9
Comparing the results of one-session, two-session, and three-session MSWO preference assessments.比较单次、双次和三次 MSWO 偏好评估的结果。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2021 Apr;54(2):700-712. doi: 10.1002/jaba.808. Epub 2021 Jan 19.
10
Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences.评估用于评估强化物偏好的多重刺激呈现形式。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Winter;29(4):519-32; quiz 532-3. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1996.29-519.
引用本文的文献
1
A Survey of Why and How Clinicians Change Reinforcers during Teaching Sessions.关于临床医生在教学过程中改变强化物的原因及方式的调查
Behav Anal Pract. 2023 Aug 29;17(3):815-830. doi: 10.1007/s40617-023-00847-4. eCollection 2024 Sep.
2
Applied Behavior Analysis and the Abolitionist Neurodiversity Critique: An Ethical Analysis.应用行为分析与废奴主义神经多样性批判：一项伦理分析。
Behav Anal Pract. 2023 Mar 2;16(4):1-17. doi: 10.1007/s40617-023-00780-6.
3
Promoting Functional Activity Engagement in People with Multiple Disabilities through the Use of Microswitch-Aided Programs.通过使用微开关辅助程序促进多重残疾人士参与功能性活动
Front Public Health. 2017 Aug 10;5:205. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00205. eCollection 2017.
4
Applied Behavior Analysis is a Science and, Therefore, Progressive.应用行为分析是一门科学，因此是不断进步的。
J Autism Dev Disord. 2016 Feb;46(2):720-31. doi: 10.1007/s10803-015-2591-6.
本文引用的文献
1
Evaluation of absolute and relative reinforcer value using progressive-ratio schedules.使用渐进比率程序评估绝对和相对强化物价值。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2008 Summer;41(2):189-202. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2008.41-189.
2
Preference assessment procedures for individuals with developmental disabilities.发育障碍个体的偏好评估程序。
Behav Modif. 2004 Sep;28(5):668-77. doi: 10.1177/0145445503259836.
3
Evaluation of a brief multiple-stimulus preference assessment in a naturalistic context.在自然情境中对简短多重刺激偏好评估的评价。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2000 Fall;33(3):353-7. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2000.33-353.
4
Further evaluation of the multiple-stimulus preference assessment.多重刺激偏好评估的进一步评估。
Res Dev Disabil. 2000 Jan-Feb;21(1):61-73. doi: 10.1016/s0891-4222(99)00030-x.
5
Relative versus absolute reinforcement effects: implications for preference assessments.相对与绝对强化效应：对偏好评估的影响
J Appl Behav Anal. 1999 Winter;32(4):479-93. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1999.32-479.
6
Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences.评估用于评估强化物偏好的多重刺激呈现形式。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Winter;29(4):519-32; quiz 532-3. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1996.29-519.
7
Integrating caregiver report with systematic choice assessment to enhance reinforcer identification.整合照顾者报告与系统的选择评估以加强强化物识别。
Am J Ment Retard. 1996 Jul;101(1):15-25.
8
Effects of psychotherapy with children and adolescents revisited: a meta-analysis of treatment outcome studies.儿童和青少年心理治疗效果再探讨：治疗结果研究的荟萃分析
Psychol Bull. 1995 May;117(3):450-68. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.450.
9
Effects of subject- versus experimenter-selected reinforcers on the behavior of individuals with profound developmental disabilities.由受试者与实验者选择的强化物对重度发育障碍个体行为的影响。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1995 Spring;28(1):61-71. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1995.28-61.
Zotero 插件