東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Assessing stimulus preferences and t...

Spevack, Sara M.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Assessing stimulus preferences and testing stimuli as reinforcers for children and adults with profound mental retardation and multiple disabilities.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Assessing stimulus preferences and testing stimuli as reinforcers for children and adults with profound mental retardation and multiple disabilities./
作者:	Spevack, Sara M.
面頁冊數:	128 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 68-01, Section: B, page: 0614.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International68-01B.
標題:	Education, Special. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=NR22119
ISBN:	9780494221198

Assessing stimulus preferences and testing stimuli as reinforcers for children and adults with profound mental retardation and multiple disabilities.
Spevack, Sara M.

Assessing stimulus preferences and testing stimuli as reinforcers for children and adults with profound mental retardation and multiple disabilities. - 128 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 68-01, Section: B, page: 0614.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Manitoba (Canada), 2007.

It is essential in the development of a successful training program for persons with profound mental retardation and multiple disabilities (PMD) to use effective reinforcers. During several experiments, a single-stimulus (SS) preference assessment has been used to identify preferred stimuli that might be reinforcers with individuals with PMD. With this method, the activities or stimuli that are being assessed are presented individually to a client. The client has a limited period of time in which to respond, and an appropriate response is followed by the opportunity to interact with the stimulus for a short time. Each stimulus is typically presented a certain number of times (e.g., 10 trials), and a high preference (HP) item is defined as a stimulus that the client responded to on 80% or more of the trials. However, there have been some discrepancies in the literature about how the SS procedure has been conducted. Some researchers have defined the preference response as a physical approach toward a presented stimulus, while others have accepted either an approach response or happiness indicators. As well, some researchers allow a participant 5 s after the stimulus has been presented to indicate a preference, while others have allowed 30 s. Each of these variations in the SS procedure may lead to different results in identifying preferred stimuli and reinforcers for these individuals. My research investigated these methodological variations to determine which was the most effective method to identify highly preferred non-edible stimuli and reinforcers for individuals with PMD. Also, I compared the SS preference assessment method for identifying preferred stimuli and reinforcers to the opinions of experienced teachers or caregivers who were familiar with each of the participants.

ISBN: 9780494221198Subjects--Topical Terms:

606639
Education, Special.

Assessing stimulus preferences and testing stimuli as reinforcers for children and adults with profound mental retardation and multiple disabilities.
LDR:04801nam 2200289 a 45 001 941512
005 20110519
008 110519s2007 eng d
020 $a 9780494221198
035 $a (UMI)AAINR22119
035 $a AAINR22119
040 $a UMI $c UMI
100 1 $a Spevack, Sara M. $3 1265603
245 1 0 $a Assessing stimulus preferences and testing stimuli as reinforcers for children and adults with profound mental retardation and multiple disabilities.
300 $a 128 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 68-01, Section: B, page: 0614.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Manitoba (Canada), 2007.
520 $a It is essential in the development of a successful training program for persons with profound mental retardation and multiple disabilities (PMD) to use effective reinforcers. During several experiments, a single-stimulus (SS) preference assessment has been used to identify preferred stimuli that might be reinforcers with individuals with PMD. With this method, the activities or stimuli that are being assessed are presented individually to a client. The client has a limited period of time in which to respond, and an appropriate response is followed by the opportunity to interact with the stimulus for a short time. Each stimulus is typically presented a certain number of times (e.g., 10 trials), and a high preference (HP) item is defined as a stimulus that the client responded to on 80% or more of the trials. However, there have been some discrepancies in the literature about how the SS procedure has been conducted. Some researchers have defined the preference response as a physical approach toward a presented stimulus, while others have accepted either an approach response or happiness indicators. As well, some researchers allow a participant 5 s after the stimulus has been presented to indicate a preference, while others have allowed 30 s. Each of these variations in the SS procedure may lead to different results in identifying preferred stimuli and reinforcers for these individuals. My research investigated these methodological variations to determine which was the most effective method to identify highly preferred non-edible stimuli and reinforcers for individuals with PMD. Also, I compared the SS preference assessment method for identifying preferred stimuli and reinforcers to the opinions of experienced teachers or caregivers who were familiar with each of the participants.
520 $a In Experiment 1, I studied eight participants with PMD, and investigated which preference assessment response (approach behaviors versus approach and/or happiness behaviors) was the most sensitive in identifying preferred stimuli and reinforcers. The design was an ABAB design. The A phases were an SS preference assessment in which the preference response was defined as an approach behavior, in order to determine which of six stimuli was the most highly preferred. The HP stimulus was then tested for its reinforcing value in maintaining the pressing of a micro-switch. The B phases were the same as the A phases, except that the preference response was defined as approach and/or happiness behaviors. For some of the participants, the phases were reversed (BABA). The two response definitions were approximately equal in identifying HP stimuli and reinforcers.
520 $a In Experiment 2 I studied 8 participants with PMD (3 of whom were new, and 5 of whom had previously participated in Experiment 1) and investigated which response interval (5 s versus 30 s) was the most effective in identifying preferred stimuli and reinforcers. The approach only preference response from Experiment 1 was used. Like Experiment 1, the design was an ABAB design, in which half of the participants received the conditions in the reverse order (BABA). During the A phases, the SS preference assessment allowed each participant 5 s to emit the preference response. The B phases were the same as the A phases, except that the participant was allowed 30 s to emit the preference response. The HP stimuli were then tested for their reinforcing value. The 30 s response interval was superior to the 5 s interval in identifying reinforcers. In both experiments, there was no correlation between caregivers' rankings of the stimuli and whether they were reinforcers for the participants. Identifying the most effective preference assessment method is important, because it allows us to identify reinforcers for teaching programs, and to increase the quality of life for individuals with PMD.
590 $a School code: 0303.
650 4 $a Education, Special. $3 606639
650 4 $a Health Sciences, Mental Health. $3 1017693
650 4 $a Psychology, Behavioral. $3 1017677
690 $a 0347
690 $a 0384
690 $a 0529
710 2 0 $a University of Manitoba (Canada). $3 1018707
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 68-01B.
790 $a 0303
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2007
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=NR22119