Examination of a One-Trial Multiple Stimulus Preference Assessment

There are several preference assessment formats that effectively determine reinforcers; however, educators and clinicians working with individuals with autism and other disabilities note that lack of time is a main barrier to frequently assessing client preference in applied settings (Graff & Karsten, 2012). Research has evaluated briefer methods of assessment (DeLeon & Iwata, 1996; DeLeon et al., 2001; Mason et al., 1989) to determine reinforcers. DeLeon et al. (2001) compared the high-preference stimulus determined in a paired-stimulus preference assessment to the stimulus selected in a brief daily multiple-stimulus without replacement preference assessment; they found that the stimulus identified in the brief assessment maintained a higher response rate when compared to the longer format stimulus, suggesting a brief assessment can effectively identify a reinforcer. The present study evaluated a one-trial multiple stimulus (OTMS) preference assessment in comparison to weekly paired-stimulus and multiple stimulus without replacement methods to determine whether presenting several stimuli one time to a participant resulted in the identification of a potent and clinically useful reinforcer.

Publication Details

Journal
eYLS (Yale Law School)
Published
2025-08-29
Primary Topic
Crystal structures of chemical compounds
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Examination of a One-Trial Multiple Stimulus Preference Assessment

eYLS (Yale Law School)
Crystal structures of chemical compounds
article

Examination of a One-Trial Multiple Stimulus Preference Assessment

article en

Abstract

There are several preference assessment formats that effectively determine reinforcers; however, educators and clinicians working with individuals with autism and other disabilities note that lack of time is a main barrier to frequently assessing client preference in applied settings (Graff & Karsten, 2012). Research has evaluated briefer methods of assessment (DeLeon & Iwata, 1996; DeLeon et al., 2001; Mason et al., 1989) to determine reinforcers. DeLeon et al. (2001) compared the high-preference stimulus determined in a paired-stimulus preference assessment to the stimulus selected in a brief daily multiple-stimulus without replacement preference assessment; they found that the stimulus identified in the brief assessment maintained a higher response rate when compared to the longer format stimulus, suggesting a brief assessment can effectively identify a reinforcer. The present study evaluated a one-trial multiple stimulus (OTMS) preference assessment in comparison to weekly paired-stimulus and multiple stimulus without replacement methods to determine whether presenting several stimuli one time to a participant resulted in the identification of a potent and clinically useful reinforcer.

eYLS (Yale Law School)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 58%
Crystal structures of chemical compounds
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Examination of a One-Trial Multiple Stimulus Preference Assessment · eYLS (Yale Law School) (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS