%0 Journal Article
%T Comparing Paired
%A Aditt Alcalay
%A Alyne Kassardjian
%A Daniel Ravid
%A Jeremy A. Leaf
%A John McEachin
%A Justin B. Leaf
%A Kathleen Tsuji
%A Misty L. Oppenheim-Leaf
%A Mitchell Taubman
%A Ronald Leaf
%A Stephanie Dale
%J Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities
%@ 1538-4829
%D 2018
%R 10.1177/1088357616645329
%X Today, the use of formal preference assessments, including paired-stimulus preference assessments, is widely utilized to help determine which items to use as reinforcers during intervention. A second way to determine potential reinforcers is to analyze multiple dimensions of a stimulus in the moment, a procedure known as in-the-moment reinforcer analysis. Although paired-stimulus preference assessments are widely used, there is no experimental evidence that extensive advance preference assessments actually produce higher rates of learning than in-the-moment reinforcer analysis. The present study compared rates of learning on a simple expressive labeling task when correct responses were reinforced with items selected based on extensive formal paired-preference assessments versus items selected by a teacher using in-the-moment analysis of reinforcer effects. The results indicated no clear difference in skill acquisition, but there were clear differences in terms of efficiency and maintenance
%K autism
%K paired-preference assessment
%K preference
%K reinforcement
%U https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1088357616645329