Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study evaluated the effectiveness of video and electronic pictorial presentation modalities in multiple stimulus without replacement (MSWO) job task preference assessments through methods comparison and evaluation of predictive validity. The study was conducted in the school setting with eight transition-age students with ASD and ID. Variations of work task preference assessment, electronic picture-based and video-based MSWO, were compared to an established assessment method, tangible stimulus MSWO. Subsequently, the predictive validity of the assessments was evaluated by observing the task engagement of participants while performing the high- and low-preference work tasks. Results suggest that electronic pictorial and video MSWO assessments of preferences are accurate and effective with some individuals and not as effective as the object modality for others. Findings, limitations, and implications for research and practice are also discussed.

Keywords

autism spectrum disorders employment transition assessment intellectual disability

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Brodhead

M. T.

Abel

E. A.

Al-Dubayan

M. N.

Brouwers

Abston

G. W.

Rispoli

M. J.

(2016). An evaluation of a brief multiple-stimulus without replacement preference assessment conducted in an electronic pictorial format. Journal of Behavioral Education, 25(4), 417–430. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-016-9254-3

Brodhead

M. T.

Al-Dubayan

M. N.

Mates

Abel

E. A.

Brouwers

(2016). An evaluation of a brief video-based multiple-stimulus without replacement preference assessment. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 9(2), 160–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-015-0081-0

Bury

S. M.

Hedley

Uljarević

Stokes

M. A.

Begeer

(2024). Employment profiles of autistic people: An 8-year longitudinal study. Autism, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613231225798

Bush

K. L.

Tassé

M. J.

(2017). Employment and choice-making for adults with intellectual disability, autism, and down syndrome. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 65, 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2017.04.004

Ciccone

F. J.

Graff

R. B.

Ahearn

W. H.

(2005). An alternate scoring method for the multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessment. Behavioral Interventions: Theory & Practice in Residential & Community-Based Clinical Programs, 20(2), 121–127. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.177

Clay

C. J.

Chuunga

O’Connor

K. V.

Kahng

(2023). Incorporating choice-making opportunities to increase engagement in leisure activities for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-023-09909-5

Clevenger

T. M.

Graff

R. B.

(2005). Assessing object-to-picture and picture-to-object matching as prerequisite skills for pictorial preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38(4), 543–547. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2005.16104

Cobigo

Morin

Lachapelle

(2009). A method to assess work task preferences. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 44(4), 561–572. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24234263

Cole

C. L.

Davenport

T. A.

Bambara

L. M.

Ager

C. L.

(1997). Effects of choice and task preference on the work performance of students with behavior problems. Behavioral Disorders, 22(2), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874299702200203

10.

Coleman

D. M.

Adams

J. B.

(2018). Survey of vocational experiences of adults with autism spectrum disorders, and recommendations on improving their employment. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 49(1), 67–78. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-180955

11.

Curiel

Poling

(2019). Web-based stimulus preference assessment and reinforcer assessment for videos. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 52(3), 796–803. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.593

12.

Davies

D. K.

Stock

S. E.

Davies

C. D.

Wehmeyer

M. L.

(2018). A cloud-supported app for providing self-directed, localized job interest assessment and analysis for people with intellectual disability. Advances in Neurodevelopmental Disorders, 2, 199–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41252-018-0062-8

13.

Davies

Romualdez

A. M.

Pellicano

Remington

(2024). Career progression for autistic people: A scoping review. Autism, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613241236110

14.

DeLeon

I. G.

Iwata

B. A.

(1996). Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29(4), 519–533. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1996.29-519

15.

Farley

Cottle

K. J.

Bilder

Viskochil

Coon

McMahon

(2018). Mid-life social outcomes for a population-based sample of adults with ASD. Autism Research, 11(1), 142–152. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1897

16.

Graff

R. B.

Karsten

A. M.

(2012). Assessing preferences of individuals with developmental disabilities: A survey of current practices. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 5(2), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03391822

17.

Hall

Morgan

R. L.

Salzberg

C. L.

(2014). Job-preference and job-matching assessment results and their association with job performance and satisfaction among young adults with developmental disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 301–312. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23880612

18.

Hanley

G. P.

Iwata

B. A.

Lindberg

J. S.

Conners

(2003). Response-restriction analysis: I. Assessment of activity preferences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36(1), 47–58. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2003.36-47

19.

Heinicke

M. R.

Carr

J. E.

Copsey

C. J.

(2019). Assessing preferences of individuals with developmental disabilities using alternative stimulus modalities: A systematic review. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 52(3), 847–869. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.565

20.

Horrocks

E. L.

Morgan

R. L.

(2009). Comparison of a video-based assessment and a multiple stimulus assessment to identify preferred jobs for individuals with significant intellectual disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30(5), 902–909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2009.01.003

21.

Huntington

R. N.

Higbee

T. S.

(2017). The effectiveness of a video-based preference assessment in identifying social reinforcers. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/15021149.2017.1404397

22.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400. (2004).

23.

LaRue

R. H.

Maraventano

J. C.

Budge

J. L.

Frischmann

(2020). Matching vocational aptitude and employment choice for adolescents and adults with ASD. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 13(3), 618–630. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-019-00398-7

24.

Lattimore

L. P.

Parsons

M. B.

Reid

D. H.

(2003). Assessing preferred work among adults with autism beginning supported jobs: Identification of constant and alternating task preferences. Behavioral Interventions, 18(3), 161–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0891-4222(97)00051-6

25.

Lee

M. S.

Nguyen

C. T.

Thorsteinsson

J. R.

Martin

T. L.

Martin

G. L.

(2008). Discrimination skills predict effective preference assessment methods for adults with developmental disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 43(3), 388–396.

26.

Lord

McCauley

J. B.

Pepa

L. A.

Huerta

Pickles

(2020). Work, living, and the pursuit of happiness: Vocational and psychosocial outcomes for young adults with autism. Autism, 24(7), 1691–1703. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361320919246

27.

Mithaug

D. E.

Hanawalt

D. A.

(1978). The validation of procedures to assess prevocational task preferences in retarded adults. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11(1), 153–162. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1978.11-153

28.

Morgan

R. L.

(2008). Job matching: Development and evaluation of a web-based instrument to assess degree of match among employment preferences. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 29(1), 29–38. https://content.iospress.com/articles/journal-of-vocational-rehabilitation/jvr00424

29.

Morgan

R. L.

Horrocks

E. L.

(2011). Correspondence between video-based preference assessment and subsequent community job performance. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 46(1), 52–61. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23880030

30.

Morris

S. L.

Vollmer

T. R.

(2020). A comparison of picture and gif-based preference assessments for social interaction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 53(3), 1452–1465. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.680

31.

Mulaire-Cloutier

Vause

Martin

G. L.

D. C. T.

(2000). Choice, task preference, task performance and happiness indicators with persons with severe developmental disabilities. International Journal of Practical Approaches to Disability, 24(1/3), 60–65.

32.

Parsons

M. B.

Reid

D. H.

Reynolds

Bumgarner

(1990). Effects of chosen versus assigned jobs on the work performance of persons with severe handicaps. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23(2), 253–258. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1990.23-253

33.

Reid

D. H.

Parsons

M. B.

Towery

Lattimore

L. P.

Green

C. W.

Brackett

(2007). Identifying work preferences among supported workers with severe disabilities: Efficiency and accuracy of a preference-assessment protocol. Behavioral Interventions, 22(4), 279–296. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.245

34.

Reyer

H. S.

Sturmey

(2006). The assessment of basic learning abilities (ABLA) test predicts the relative efficacy of task preferences for persons with developmental disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 50(6), 404–409. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2005.00780.x

35.

Roux

A. M.

Rast

J. E.

Anderson

K. A.

Shattuck

P. T.

(2016). National autism indicators report: Vocational rehabilitation. Life Course Outcomes Research Program, A.J. Drexel Autism Institute, Drexel University. https://drexel.edu/autismoutcomes/publications-and-reports/publications/National-Autism-Indicators-Report-Vocational-Rehabilitation/

36.

Snyder

Higbee

T. S.

Dayton

(2012). Preliminary investigation of a video-based stimulus preference assessment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45(2), 413–418. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-413

37.

Spevack

Martin

T. L.

Hiebert

C. T.

Martin

G. L.

(2004). Effects of choice of work tasks on on-task, aberrant, happiness and unhappiness behaviors of persons with developmental disabilities. Journal on Developmental Disabilities, 11(2), 79–97.

38.

St. Peter

Shuler

N. J.

Toegel

Diaz-Salvat

Jones

S. H

. (2021). Using preference assessments to identify preferred job tasks for adolescents with autism. Education and Treatment of Children, 45, 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43494-021-00061-3

39.

Tullis

C. A.

Seaman-Tullis

R. L.

(2019). Incorporating preference assessment into transition planning for people with autism spectrum disorder. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 12(3), 727–733. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-019-00353-6

40.

Walsh

Lydon

Holloway

(2020). An evaluation of assistive technology in determining job-specific preference for adults with autism and intellectual disabilities. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 13(2), 434–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-019-00380-3

41.

Wehman

Schall

McDonough

Sima

Brooke

Ham

Whittenburg

Brooke

Avellone

Riehle

(2020). Competitive employment for transition-aged youth with significant impact from autism: A multi-site randomized clinical trial. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50(6), 1882–1897. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-03940-2

42.

Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. Pub. L. No. 113-128 § 422. (2014). https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr803

Comparison of Technology-Based Presentation Modalities in Multi-Stimulus Job Task Preference Assessments

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References