Northup J, George T, Jones K, Broussard C, Vollmer T R
Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge 70803, USA.
J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Summer;29(2):201-12. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1996.29-201.
We compared three methods of stimulus preference assessment for verbal children and specifically evaluated the utility of a verbal choice procedure for assessing relative reinforcer value. Using a token system, relative preference for five categories of reinforcers, representing 15 different stimuli, was assessed by three methods: a reinforcer survey, a verbal stimulus-choice questionnaire, and a pictorial stimulus-choice procedure. Results showed that the verbal and pictorial stimulus-choice assessments accurately identified high- and low-preference categories for 3 of 4 participants. Survey results alone often rated multiple categories as high preference, were less likely to identify low-preference categories, and were less likely to correspond with the results of a reinforcer assessment.
我们比较了三种针对能言语儿童的刺激偏好评估方法,并特别评估了言语选择程序在评估相对强化物价值方面的效用。使用代币系统,通过三种方法评估了代表15种不同刺激的五类强化物的相对偏好:强化物调查、言语刺激选择问卷和图片刺激选择程序。结果显示,言语和图片刺激选择评估准确地识别出了4名参与者中3人的高偏好和低偏好类别。仅调查结果往往将多个类别评为高偏好,识别低偏好类别的可能性较小,且不太可能与强化物评估结果相符。